Rethinking Global Citizenship Resources For New Teachers: Promoting Critical Thinking and Equity
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
Global citizenship education, or education aiming to develop teacher candidates' knowledge and empathy with transnational challenges, has become increasingly recognized as an important field internationally, requiring a particular set of pedagogical understandings and tools to facilitate learning.Traditionally, global citizenship education resources have been developed by non-governmental organizations to aid teachers in classroom presentations and to profile issues of concern to their constituencies.Understandably, some of these resources require revisions to correspond with teacher candidates' grade levels, learning styles, subject-based disciplines and broad issues of equity.Accordingly, we developed a guide for teacher education candidates and novice teachers based on a collaborative inquiry model that we called a "Primer" in order to assess the compatibility, equity and adaptability of classroom-ready global citizenship education materials.Our aims were to understand how pre-service candidates made use of the Primer as a means to integrate global citizenship topics in the regular curriculum.Based on our research-which was informed by a mixed-method methodology consisting of focus groups, journal reporting, and survey data-we documented teacher education candidates' experiences with the Primer.Our research of how teacher candidates made use of the Primer, offers evidence that their desires and abilities to teach global citizenship themes through classroom-ready resources has been facilitated by utilizing the Primer.Rethinking Global Citizenship Resources for New Teachers 23 * How are differing points of view reconciled in the resource? Pedagogic Questions* What additional research do you need to complete to be able to use this resource?* Is any media or technology integrated into the resource?Is it appropriate for the age and level in terms of interest, cognition and developmental stages?Are there supportive questions to accompany the technological/media resources?* Are assessment and evaluation items suggested for the resource?How do these suggestions fit with Curriculum documents in your region, stages of development, and outcome statements?* Are the content and process components appropriately connected?* Are any of the following strategies used, and if so, are they used appropriately (given the level, age and content)? role plays simulations cooperative learning community service document analysis decision-making.* Is there a reasonable balance of interactive strategies and information providing?(Assess the difficulty of the concept, for which information provision is usually required.)* Is there an opportunity for students to communicate their knowledge or opinions on a topic in a variety of ways, utilizing for example, recognition of Gardners' "Multiple Intelligences"?* Are students invited to seek additional information from a variety of sources? Equity Concerns:
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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