Children's lived experiences of 'ability' in the Key Stage One classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This empirical research examined evidence of children's lived experience of 'ability' from two case study classes of 5-7 year olds in primary schools in England. ‘Thick description’ (Geertz 1973) of the children's lived experiences was created using children's classroom tours, classroom representations and interviews alongside non-participant observation of everyday classroom life and interviews with the class teachers. For these children, findings are that their lived experience of 'ability' is highly individual and shaped by the scope of their awareness and their attention to an individual combination of features of classroom life, particularly structural, social and pedagogic. The class teachers partially shaped the children's experiences through their teaching choices, underlying beliefs about 'ability' and own experiences (as a child and as a teacher) but this varied significantly for each child depending upon how their individual lived experience was shaped. The findings from these two classes suggest that policy and research into 'ability' in early schooling should be considered with a recognition that there could be significant variation in how this is experienced by individual children. Therefore, in making teaching choices at classroom level we might consider a wide range of aspects as potentially influential in shaping children's experiences of 'ability' and therefore pay close attention to the individual children in the class and what they attend to most in their classroom, as well as well as our own beliefs and experiences.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".