MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604593608 · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-55432-1_6

Teaching History for Narrative Space and Vitality: Historical Consciousness, Templates, and English-Speaking Quebec

2017· book-chapter· en· W2604593608 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul Zanazanian

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeVitalityConsciousnessIdentity (music)Context (archaeology)AestheticsSpace (punctuation)SociologyHistoryEpistemologyLiteratureArtLinguisticsArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zanazanian introduces a template-like narrative tool that seeks to make room for excluded minorities in the teaching of school history and to provide them vitality for regeneration purposes. He explores the links between historical consciousness and James Wertsch’s ideas on narrative and focuses on the experiences of Quebec’s historic English-speaking minority to illustrate. The province’s unique context and challenges to providing curricular space for the community inform the rationale behind the tool’s ambitious yet exploratory nature. Simplifying the past to encourage identity building while complicating it to expand horizons, the tool prompts and frames students’ own produced narratives of belonging. It specifically engages them with the workings and uses of history to articulate their understandings and account for their emerging knowledge claims. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207