MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122607195 · doi:10.1002/tea.20422

Cultural diversity in science education through <i>Novelization</i>: Against the <i>Epicization</i> of science and cultural centralization

2011· article· en· W2122607195 on OpenAlexaff
Michiel van Eijck, Wolff‐Michael Roth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research in Science Teaching · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)SociologyScience educationUnitary stateCultural diversityFace (sociological concept)GlobalizationEpistemologySocial sciencePedagogyMathematics educationPsychologyAnthropologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Science educators are confronted with the challenge to accommodate in their classes an increasing cultural and linguistic diversity that results from globalization. Challenged by the call to work towards valuing and keeping this diversity in the face of the canonical nature of school science discourse, we propose a new way of thinking about and investigating these problems. Drawing on the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, we articulate epicization and novelization as concepts that allow us to understand, respectively, the processes of (a) centralizing and homogenizing culture and language and (b) pluralizing culture and language. We present and analyze three examples that exhibit how existing mundane science education practices tend, by means of epicization, towards a unitary language and to cultural centralization. We then propose novelization as a way for thinking the opening up of science education by interacting with and incorporating alternative forms of knowing that arise from cultural diversity. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 48: 824–847, 2011

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)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.061
Scholarly communication0.0130.013
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.273
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research in Science TeachingSame topicInnovative Education and Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207