Finding Identity: Using the Literary and Visual Arts as Reflexive Tools / Lettres de possibilités et d’évolution pédagogique : réflexions personnelles issues de mon projet « Quête d’identité »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This paper addresses reflections from my research when using letter-writing as an arts-based method for exploring curriculum implications within an alternative educational program in a Montreal inner-city high school. The participants, comprised of the program’s students as well as its administrators and teachers, informed the research by shedding light on their experiences of the teaching and learning that occurs in such setting. By combining the literary and visual arts, the study participants explored the theme of identity through the creation of letters, and visual arts responses. As a result of this work, I employ letter-writing in this paper to address the critical and pedagogic discourses experienced and support for a call to shift educational paradigms.Keywords: Pedagogy; Letters; Narratives; Education; Discourse.Résumé : Cet article porte sur les réflexions issues de mes recherches axées sur la rédaction de lettres comme méthode artistique d’analyse des répercussions des programmes, dans le cadre d’un programme éducatif alternatif au sein d’une école secondaire « anonyme » d’un centre-ville. Ces recherches sont basées sur les différents participants, à savoir étudiants, administrateurs et enseignants, qui ont bien voulu partager leurs expériences d’enseignement et d’apprentissage dans le contexte précité. En regroupant arts littéraires et visuels, les participants à l’étude ont exploré la thématique de l’identité par la rédaction de lettres et de créations en arts visuels. J’utilise donc ici, par le fruit de ces travaux, la rédaction de lettres pour traiter des discours critiques et pédagogiques reçus et promouvoir une évolution des paradigmes éducatifs.Mots-clés : Pédagogie, lettres, récits, éducation, discours.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".