MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184930990 · doi:10.36510/learnland.v3i1.311

Commentary: Thoughts on Three Decades in Literacy Education: Why Don't We Ever Learn?

2009· article· en· W2184930990 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Susan Church

Bibliographic record

VenueLEARNing Landscapes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiteracyCurriculumSeniorityWork (physics)Generative grammarMathematics educationPedagogySociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringLawArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Literacy teaching and learning and education more generally seem destined to be buffeted by periodic pendulum swings between more and less regulation of curriculum, assessment and teachers’ work. Reflecting from a position of seniority, I speculate in this commentary on how the trajectory of progressive and generative theories and practices in literacy education might have been altered if such swings had not been so pervasive over the past several decades. Drawing on insights that have guided my own thirty-plus years of work to advance critically reflective and progressive literacy education, I suggest that greater attention to some wise words from past decades might help today’s educators to resist the never-ending pull of the pendulum.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLEARNing LandscapesSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207