MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2308132901

Aaishah’s choice: Choosing home education in the Muslim community

2016· article· en· W2308132901 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca English

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty of Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Education Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPseudonymPopularitySociologyQualitative researchHome educationFutures contractGender studiesQualitative analysisPsychologyPedagogyPublic relationsSocial scienceSocial psychologyPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Australia, the decision to home educate is becoming increasingly popular (cf. Townsend, 2012). In spite of its increasing popularity, the reasons home education is chosen by Australian families is under-researched (cf. Jackson & Allan, 2010). In addition, the decision to home educate among minority groups, such as Australian Muslim families, is absent from the literature. This paper reports on an interview with one Muslim mother who chose to home educate her children. An in-depth, qualitative interview was conducted with Aaishah (pseudonym), a mother who lived in one of Australia’s most populated cities. Data were analysed using the Discourse Historical Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis. The analysis revealed that there were similarities between the discourses of Christian parents described in the literature, in terms of the reasons Aaishah had given for her decision to home educate. In particular, analysis reveals Aaishah’s fears about schools, their negative experiences on her children and her hopes for her children’s futures.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.344 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty of EducationSame topicDiverse Education Studies and ReformsFrench-language works237,207