MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740799681 · doi:10.4148/2470-6353.1190

Learning from Others: Literacy Perspectives of Middle-School English Teachers

2002· article· en· W2740799681 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia A. Lassonde

Bibliographic record

VenueNetworks An Online Journal for Teacher Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsCanarie
FundersUniversity at Albany
KeywordsPortraitLiteracyCurriculumPedagogyMathematics educationSociologyLiteracy educationPsychologyArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the center of this interview-based study, middle-school English teachers talk and write about their literacy development, their teaching philosophies, and their curriculum, as they reflect upon their teaching. Portraits of their perspectives of literacy emerge. Using these portraits to reflect upon teaching practices, the author suggests we can effectively examine our own educational philosophies, contributing to our efforts to become increasingly competent educators.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.199
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetworks An Online Journal for Teacher ResearchSame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207