MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114151712 · doi:10.4471/remie.2013.17

¿Quién es un ciudadano activo y qué roles desempeña en la vida democrática? Una experiencia de educación cívica ciudadana en Canadá

2013· article· es· W2114151712 on OpenAlexaffabout
Luz Alison Molina-Girón

Bibliographic record

VenueMultidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aún cuando educar ciudadanos activos que participan en la vida democrática es un objetivo fundamental de la educación, en general, y de la Educación Cívica Ciudadana, en particular, hay muy pocas investigaciones empíricas que nos informan cómo la escuela educa para tal fin. Este estudio, conducido en tres aulas de Educación Cívica en Ontario, Canadá, investiga en qué medida y cómo los profesores educan ciudadanos activos, cívicamente comprometidos. Haciendo use de las teorías de la ciudadanía activa como marco teórico y métodos etnográficos incluyendo observaciones de clases y entrevistas con profesores y alumnos, los resultados del estudio revelan que las concepciones de quien es un ciudadano activo y los roles que desempeña en la vida pública influyen grandemente en como los profesores educan para la ciudadanía activa. En la práctica, hay tres distintas concepciones de la ciudadanía activa que enfatizan (a) el deber cívico, (b) hacer una diferencia positiva, y (c) una participación de orientación política. El artículo concluye con una discusión de las implicaciones de los diferentes enfoques para la educación para la ciudadanía democrática.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0370.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultidisciplinary Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207