Raising Historical Consciousness in the Novel “The Giver”, a Dystopic Work According to Social Studies Teacher Candidates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that in many of the developed countries of the world, especially the U.S.A, educators benefit from dystopic works in education and training of the topics such as historical consciousness, metaphors, numbers, color perception and development of language. From this point forth, it can be suggested that dystopic works, as long as they are presented by expert trainers through correct methods and techniques, can provide great benefits for historical consciousness, cognitive, social and cultural development, and especially democratic awareness. The main purpose of this study is to draw attention on the significant contributions that dystopic works can make on historical consciousness and education. The survey is conducted within 2014-2015 academic year in Agri Ibrahim Cecen University Faculty of Education Department of Social Sciences Teaching (4th grade) and views of these participants on acquisition of historical consciousness through the novel “The Giver” are examined through qualitative research method. During the survey, while determining the students’ views, indications concerning the cover and content of the book, as well as the fiction, characterization and narration are obtained and exposed to content analysis. As a result of the survey, it is observed that dystopic works, especially “The Giver” can offer significant benefits for the acquisition of historical consciousness.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".