MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507413013

APPROACHES TO STUDENT ENGAGEMENT: DOES IDEOLOGY MATTER?

2003· article· en· W2507413013 on OpenAlexaff
Ann Vibert, Carolyn M. Sheilds

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l'éducation de McGill · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyTransformative learningSociologyHumanitiesArgument (complex analysis)PoliticsPedagogyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT. This paper examines the concept of as an inescapably ideological term. The paper begins by problematizing politically neutral iterations of student engagement in the literature on school improvement and school effectiveness. Then, drawing on data collected during a much larger national study of student engagement, it provides an analysis of differential meanings of student engagement across three ideological lenses: a techno-rational, an interpretive/student-centred, and a critical transformative lens. Examples of policy and practice in action in schools and classrooms are posited as illustrative of the various ideological lenses, and educational/political consequences of such stances are explored. Culminating in an argument for a critical/transformative pedagogy as providing possibilities for a just and humane education, the paper concludes that ideology does, indeed, matter. FACONS D'ABORDER L'ENGAGEMENT DES ELEVES : L'IDEOLOGIE COMPTE-T-ELLE ? RESUME. Cet article analyse la notion d'engagement des comme terme ineluctablement ideologique. Les auteurs commencent par etablir la problematique des iterations politiquement neutres de l'engagement des eleves dans la documentation consacree a l'amelioration et a l'efficacite scolaire. S'inspirant ensuite des donnees recueillies dans le cadre d'une etude nationale de beaucoup plus grande envergure sur l'engagement des eleves, elles proposent une analyse des sens differentiels de l'engagement des eleves dans trois optiques ideologiques: techno-nationale, interpretative/axee sur les eleves et critique/transformationnelle. Des exemples des politiques et des pratiques a l'oeuvre dans les ecoles et les salles de cours illustrent les diverses optiques ideologiques et les auteurs etudient les consequences educatives et politiques de ces points de vue, Elles terminent leur article en affirmant que l'ideologie compte effectivement en arguant pour une pedagogique critique/transformationnelle qui offre des possibilites d'education juste et humaine.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.029
Scholarly communication0.0180.009
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.398
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.048 · 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

Citations83
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l'éducation de McGillSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207