MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021383496 · doi:10.3102/0013189x032003003

An Anatomy of Narrative Curricula

2003· article· en· W2021383496 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Researcher · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDigital Storytelling and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeCurriculumNarrative criticismPhenomenonNarrative inquiryNarrative networkRelation (database)Function (biology)PsychologySociologyPedagogyEpistemologyMathematics educationLiteratureComputer scienceArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As curricular qualities of various narrative practices become more diverse and widely established, a clearer understanding of their particular nature and function should accompany their use. This article reviews rather far-flung practices in relation to the particular narrative functions on which they rely. The author uses Schwab’s commonplaces as common denominators that cut across practices to determine different locations for curricular gain. Then, without wanting to tear apart what is essentially a holistic phenomenon, the author looks at narrative curricula through three different lenses, named by Genette (1980) “narrative,” “story,” and “narrating.” These facets of narrative are highlighted in different ways in various curricula, prompting different forms of narrative engagement. They help locate and distinguish different outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.422 · 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