Bibliographic record
Abstract
From September to December 2009, a class of teacher candidates completed a Bachelor of Education course titled English Language Arts: Secondary Curriculum and Instruction. The instructor introduced himself at the beginning of the course as an a/r/tographer who is an artist, a researcher, and a teacher. He invited students to think about the possibilities of their being a/r/tographers, and to think about how they live in the world, as well as in their new emerging identities in the Bachelor of Education program, as artists and researchers and teachers. The teacher candidates were invited to think about how they werebecoming pedagogical, and how they could sustain their hearts in the dynamic and complex process of becoming pedagogical.They were reminded that teacher candidates are not learning a toolbox of skills and strategies for teaching; they are learning how to navigate the tangled and complex world of human beings in communities called schools.Keywords: teacher education; lifewriting; a/r/tography; credo; creativity
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".