MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523654816

READING BEYOND BIAS: USING HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS IN THE SECONDARY CLASSROOM

2003· article· en· W2523654816 on OpenAlex
Ruth Sandwell

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l'éducation de McGill · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSecondary educationArtSociologyPedagogy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT. Social studies and history teachers have, in recent years, taken up with enthusiasm the use of real historical documents, (primary sources) in elementary and secondary classrooms across North America. Such documents have an immediacy, and often a personal element, that is more interesting to students than the history found in the average textbook. This paper argues, however, that the pedagogical promise of primary documents is too often limited to a superficial appeal, and the potential of primary documents to stimulate either critical thinking or deeper learning about the past is limited to an analysis of bias. Beginning with a quick overview of the remarkable potential of primary documents in history education, the paper goes on to provide some practical examples of how teachers can most effectively use them in the classroom. LIRE SANS PREJUGES: L'UTILISATION DE DOCUMENTS HISTORIQUES DANS LES CLASSES AU SECONDAIRE RESUME. Depuis quelques annees, dans les ecoles primaires et secondaires d'Amerique du Nord, les enseignants d'histoire et de sciences humaines ont adopte, avec enthousiasme, l'utilisation de documents historiques authentiques, appeles aussi documents de premieres mains; et ce, dans les ecoles d'enseignement primaire et secondaire de toute l'Amerique du Nord. Ce type de documents offre une immediatete et, frequemment, une touche de personnalite, qui les rendent plus interessants que l'histoire telle que presentee dans les livres. Cet article soutient, cependant, que le potentiel pedagogique des documents authentiques est souvent superficiel et que leur utilisation pour stimuler soit l'esprit critique soit un apprentissage en profondeur se limite a une analyse des 'partis pris'. Debutant par un survol du grand potentiel des documents authentiques, cet article poursuit en donnant des exemples pratiques pour utiliser plus efficacement en classe ce type de documents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.431
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.038 · 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