A case study of curriculum leadership and development with a global perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In April, 1990, a team of teachers at General Wolfe Elementary School, Vancouver, B.C., began the planning and design of an interrelated curriculum with a global perspective. The implementation of the interrelated grade 6 and 7 curriculum, named "Wolfe's E.Y.E.S. (Elementary Youth Earth Studies)", commenced in September, 1990. During the 1990-1991 school year, the teaching team concentrated its efforts on cross-curricular approaches to develop a practical infrastructure that significantly connected skills and content from the various curricular domains. Their eclectic reworking of the school's existing curriculum models to include a global perspective provided opportunities for the team to gain professional knowledge within the context of their own classrooms. The problems addressed in this study are: What does the infrastructure of the global curriculum look like; and what were the roles of the practitioners in the context of this curriculum development? This study is a unique-case description of a site-developed curriculum initiated by a team of elementary teachers. This recording of their first year of collaboration is derived from their planning notes, day-books, unit plans, files, yearly previews, journals, photographs and audio and video tapes. The purpose of this document is to present evidence of curriculum leadership and development in global education. This study consists of descriptions of the global curriculum and the team's leadership roles, followed by a two part comparative analysis using elements indicating effective curriculum leadership and development. The study concludes that indicators of effective curriculum leadership and development are present, that the team's work has influenced the school's culture, and that practising elementary teachers can assume leadership in initiating curriculum change.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".