MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2231049118 · doi:10.1177/183693911303800303

Lived Childhood Experiences: Collective Storytelling for Teacher Professional Learning and Social Change

2013· article· en· W2231049118 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Early Childhood · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsExtendicare (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStorytellingSituatedPedagogyEarly childhood educationSociologyEarly childhoodSubjectivityValue (mathematics)Professional learning communityProject commissioningAction researchLived experienceCritical theoryPublishingPsychologyProfessional developmentNarrativeDevelopmental psychologyEpistemologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THIS IS THE STORY OF KIDS’ DOMAIN, an early childhood centre in New Zealand. It traces their journey through a four-year action research project shaped around collective storytelling, where the purpose was to understand the self, others and teaching differently. The research was situated within poststructuralist feminist and critical pedagogical theories because these celebrate the multiple and contradictory; value subjectivity; and challenge social inequities, which this project aimed to do. The sharing of stories challenged teachers' perspectives and impacted on both relationships and teaching. Teachers were challenged as they listened to complex and sometimes contradictory storylines, and at times these confronted and disrupted what had previously been taken for granted. This encouraged teachers to reconsider how they might be teachers, and how they might contribute to a more socially just world each day in their own setting.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.029
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Journal of Early ChildhoodSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207