Interacting narratives: creating and re‐creating the self
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article is a report of a qualitative research study into the aesthetic and spiritual dimensions of the lifelong learning practices of eight experienced educators. The research is grounded in a narrative tradition of research on teacher development where teacher learning is viewed as a creative, holistic, relational endeavour in which the personal and professional are intimately connected. It makes connections between narrative inquiry, holistic education and teacher development, and makes a contribution to the body of knowledge in teachers’ knowledge/ learning by demonstrating that in the experience of the study’s participants, meaningful lifelong learning is an ongoing process of creating and recreating the self. Notes 1. This research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). 2. The narrative account is an interim step in the representation of the data, created after two‐thirds of the data is collected. The participant receives and responds to the account, which then provides the basis for further inquiry. 3. Anam Cara is Gaelic for ‘soul friend’. Additional informationNotes on contributorsMary Beattie Mary Beattie is an associate professor of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada. Her books include Narratives in the Making: Teaching and Learning at Corktown Community High School (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004), and The Art of Learning to Teach: Preservice Teacher Narratives (New Jersey: Merrill Prentice‐Hall, 2001). Darrell Dobson Darrell Dobson, Gail Thornton and Laura Hegge are Ph.D. candidates in Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".