A Preliminary Analytical Framework for Comparative Analysis of Alternative Primary Education Programs in Developing Nations.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a quiet revolution growing in schooling in many parts of the developing world,, particularly at the primary level. These mostly successful radical alternatives are little known among educators and scholars of education. In many cases, children who are considered the hardest to reach and teach accomplish curricular objectives not achieved in traditional formal schools. These programs also demonstrate that, contrary to popular belief, teachers are not obstacles to change but are the change agents. These teachers manage to develop or change their practice so fundamentally that they produce large learning gains among children thought to be unteachable. These successful change programs typically spread not by a centrally planned and mandated reform plan but by teachers learning from other teachers and sharing their personal practical knowledge and skills with each other. Administrative leadership often plays a critical role in these programs, but it differs from the traditional model in that it enables teacher learning and teacher-driven change, rather than controlling and regulating teaching. The question that arises is, how have these successes actually occurred in each case, given the history of failed attempts at large-scale educational reform? Four figures are presented as a preliminary effort to develop a useful set of categories for comparative analysis of these cases. It is hoped that they will be used to design a long-term research program that will enable us to avoid repeating past failures. (Contains 30 references.) (TD) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. A PRELIMINARY ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE PRIMARY EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN DEVELOPING NATIONS DR. JOSEPH P. FARRELL OBED MFUM-MENSAH ONTARIO INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION/UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
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 | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.001 |
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".