MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2284694956

The responses of Canadian and Chinese teachers and university instructors to picture books : a case study rooted in a content analysis of Canadian and Chinese award-winning picture books (2004-2014)

2015· article· en· W2284694956 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jing Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContent (measure theory)Content analysisMathematics educationPicture booksSociologyPsychologyMedia studiesPedagogyVisual artsSocial scienceArtMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore through a social constructivist framework the similarities and differences emerging from a set of Canadian and Chinese award-winning picture books published between 2004 and 2014. In addition to the application of Radical Change characteristics to the picture book set, responses of eight participants in Canadian and Chinese academic and teaching contexts were also explored through semi-structured interviews related to conceptualizations and use of children’s picture books. Child-image and theme were investigated through content analysis. The exploration illuminated that the most frequent child-image was child who encounters difficulties. Child-as-problem solver and playing/imaginative child were more reflected in the Canadian titles, while the Chinese titles included more child-as-narrator and moral/life model. The theme of moral/life lessons was frequently represented by the selected titles, whereas the biggest difference between the two cultural categories was imagination/fantasy, with the Chinese study set involving it far less often. The most obvious Radical Change type was changing forms and formats. The most important purpose of using picture books in both Canadian and Chinese contexts appeared to be books as teaching tools. There has been a considerable amount of imagination/fantasy or children with authentic characterization/special needs in the selected books, yet the participants believed there was a dearth of the particular theme or child-image in current picture books. This study indicates potential for further comparative studies of Canadian and Chinese award-winning picture books, and extends the knowledge of picture books, to address current gaps in the literature, particularly as available research relates to the creation, evaluation and use of picture books.

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)0.010
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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0190.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207