At-promise Students: a study of urban student learning in Alberta within the context of science education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As teachers and educators, we have power, be it destructive or supportive. As such, we have a duty to our students to understand their complexities. The purpose of my research which utilizes a Constructivist Grounded Theory methodology by means of a case study approach in the context of science education is not aimed at an improvement of performance, but rather hopes to provide a situational and contextual understanding of learning. Urban youth live a life in flux, in almost constant change. A place of learning needs to acknowledge this fluctuation, as place is merely the backdrop for the potential for relationship-building and, thus, learning. The breakthroughs that occurred as a result of this research were not because of the location in which the learning took place, but because an opportunity was presented to nurture the space for relationships within the places – a concept I have coined as‘s/place.’ Within the place of school, spaces exist for relationship-building and the creation of hybrid identities in which students’ multiple selves are acknowledged and thus s/place becomes the confluence of space and place. I conducted my research in an urban setting because students who live, study and work in urban environments are often overlooked. Their brilliance is dulled through a consistent grinding down of who they are and by being told that what they know is not valued. My hope is that my work demonstrates that change is not only possible but achievable if we are open to listening to the voices of the unheard and often overlooked youth in our classrooms.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".