MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W196429342 · doi:10.1177/117718010600300106

The Development of Emotional Competency through the use of Aboriginal Literature

2006· article· en· W196429342 on OpenAlexaff
Lee Brown, Lyn Daniels

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional competencePsychologyCurriculumEmotional intelligenceIdentity (music)Plan (archaeology)Value (mathematics)PedagogyMedical educationDevelopmental psychologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Emotional Competency Through the Use of Aboriginal Literature Project explored the development of emotional competency with students from cross-cultural backgrounds. The project focused on developing teachers’ abilities to plan and create learning opportunities for students to engage with the emotions of characters in Aboriginal literature as a means of developing their own emotional skills. In addition, the project created an understanding of how emotions are developed into values and enhanced respect for the diverse value systems represented by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students in the classroom as an aspect of emotional competency. The teachers attended a one-day workshop on emotional competency with an introduction to Aboriginal literature. Teachers were provided with an emotional competency curriculum development guide to help them apply the principles of emotional development to their lesson plans. In addition, they were provided with an introduction to the methods by which literature informs identity. This article will focus on the initial findings of the project. We will examine the implementation of the six principles of emotional competency into classroom practice. The article examines the difficulties and successes of using Aboriginal literature to develop emotional competency and explores the effect the project had on the emotional and identity development of those involved in the project.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous PeoplesSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207