MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2933107308

Peace-building Learning Opportunities in Ordinary Schools: Youth in Violent Surroundings in Mexico, Bangladesh, and Canada

2019· article· en· W2933107308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathy Bickmore

Bibliographic record

Venue2019 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeace and Human Rights Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacebuildingCurriculumContext (archaeology)CitizenshipStructural violenceDemocracyPolitical scienceSociologyPeace educationPedagogyEconomic growthPublic relationsPublic administrationPoliticsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines learning opportunities for peacebuilding offered in the context of daily lessons in regular public schools surrounded by violence.  Publicly funded schooling can exacerbate as well as mitigate direct and indirect systemic destructive conflict.  Yet, public schools also provide opportunities for advancing democratic peacebuilding social transformation.  What understandings and learning opportunities about the roles people could play in handling conflict and peace are embedded in local curriculum guidelines and in teachers’ implemented curriculum?  How do these perspectives compare with young students’ understandings and concerns, rooted in lived experience of direct and indirect violence (and peace)?  What promising building blocks emerge for peacebuilding education?  The paper draws from a multi-year research project, “Peace-Building Citizenship Learning,” examining intersections and disjunctures between the lived experiences of youth (age 10-15) and their teachers’ implemented curriculum, in selected elementary and intermediate public schools in marginalized urban communities experiencing violence in Mexico, Bangladesh and Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2019 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of EducationSame topicPeace and Human Rights EducationFrench-language works237,207