Cultural Mismatch in Roma Parents’ Perceptions: The Role of Culture, Language, and Traditional Roma Values in Schools
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article draws on data from a two-year qualitative study exploring the factors contributing to Roma students’ disparate outcomes in Bulgaria. I utilize ethnographic observations, oral history, and in-depth interviews with twenty Roma parents to gain understanding of Roma children’s “cultural capital” and relation to formal schools. The article builds on theoretical orientations, generated primarily in the U.S., that emphasize strengths and the need for culturally relevant pedagogy, and explores the possibility to extend these to the case of Roma communities in Europe. The findings indicate that the traditional education of Roma children differs considerably from the mainstream values emphasized in Bulgarian schools. These include the practice of community-based, informal education, child independence, and early participation in adult life, which have the potential to make the transition from home to school problematic. I argue that if educational equity is the goal, policies and practices must shift their current focus from promoting a monocultural Bulgarian curriculum and pedagogical approaches to meaningful incorporation of culturally relevant content and creating educational environments conductive to Roma students’ learning.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it