MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2424097618 · doi:10.37119/ojs2016.v22i1.253

Teacher Attrition in a Northern Ontario Remote First Nation: A Narrative Re-Storying

2016· article· en· W2424097618 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dawn Burleigh

Bibliographic record

Venuein education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttritionMentorshipNarrativeGovernment (linguistics)Teacher inductionPerspective (graphical)Political scienceTeacher educationQuality (philosophy)PedagogyPublic relationsSociologyMedical educationPsychologyProfessional developmentMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing teacher retention in First Nations communities has been identified in the literature as requiring attention. When attrition rates are high and teacher efficacy, quality of student experience, and overall academic achievement is compromised, efforts to mobilize plans for stability are needed. Through a narrative re-storying approach this paper unpacks the challenges and opportunities related to teacher attrition in one remote First Nation community in Northern Ontario. Although teacher attrition is inevitable, it is necessary to re-envision attrition factors as a plan for retention. Community integrated induction and mentorship programming, and continuous and multi-year contracts are two possible approaches to boost retention. Teacher education is also explored as a long-term approach to address teacher attrition from a system perspective. In all approaches, collaborative effort, engagement, and funding are needed from the federal government, local education authorities, and faculties of education to increase teacher retention in remote First Nation communities.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuein educationSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207