MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592037172 · doi:10.18357/jcs.v36i2.15085

The ‘Value of Locality’ in Early Childhood Settings: Pedagogical Documentation in the Reggio Emilia Educational Project

2011· article· en· W2592037172 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stefania Giamminuti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Childhood Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocalityEarly childhoodEarly childhood educationDocumentationToddlerContext (archaeology)Value (mathematics)SociologyPedagogyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article engages with the notions of locality and community in early childhood settings. Locality is conceptualized as a ‘value’ in the context of the experience of the municipal infant-toddler centers and ‘schools of childhood’ (scuole d’infanzia) of Reggio Emilia, Italy. The article is drawn from a recent study (Giamminuti, 2009) which engages with questions of quality, values and relationships in early childhood education and care. Participants in the study include educators, families, and children that were part of the learning communities of Arcobaleno Infant-Toddler Center and Pablo Neruda School. This article focuses on the value of locality as experienced in Reggio Emilia, and offers an invitation to early childhood settings internationally to consider: the importance of positioning oneself in time, history, and place; the significance of constructing a collective sense of locality; and the value of conceptualizing and living early childhood settings as places that belong to children.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.029
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Childhood StudiesSame topicEducational and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207