MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146476860

1 Re-conceptualizing English Language Education through Autobiography: Toward a Pedagogy of Humiliations and Humanness

2014· article· en· W2146476860 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer-Lynn Bene

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiographySociologyPedagogyPsychologyLinguisticsPhilosophyLiteratureArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers how English language educators might use autobiography as a pedagogical form to engage their multiple experiences and relations to English and Englishness, and to consider implications for their work. Reflecting on autobiography from this perspective offers possibilities for grappling with our multiple connections and dis-connections to English and Englishness, becoming conscious of the discourses which shape us as educators, and engaging difference in productive and meaningful ways. In undertaking autobiography, we face aspects of ourselves, often aspects that come into conflict. This process of dis-equilibrium has the potential to engender a shift in understanding that helps us to re-conceptualize normative constructions and representations of English language pedagogy. This is a necessary undertaking for educators attempting to work with/in the possibilities of engaging reflectively and critically in English language education. It also offers a space to consider how we might use English ‘appropriately’ in our teachings and engagements. “Any meaning derived from a source outside our acts murders us” (Cooper as cited in Pinar, 2000b, p. 374).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.037
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.398 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207