Engaging Children in Citizenship Education: A Children's Rights Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors argue that recent initiatives in citizenship education are deficient in failing to provide an engaging values framework for the practice of citizenship. Although an international consensus has arisen on the need for stronger citizenship education in schools and for learning that is issues based, collaborative, and participatory, the consensus has not resulted in appropriate action. Progress has been hampered because of the lack of capacity building and opportunities for meaningful participation. But the problem does not end here. A major shortcoming is the continuing absence of a values framework that engages students and motivates them for citizenship. The authors suggest that when citizenship education is constructed on the basis of treating children as valued citizens and educating them about their rights and responsibilities under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, a much stronger foundation is laid for the practice of citizenship.
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 | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.072 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".