MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991373521 · doi:10.18546/lre.17.3.11

Mock elections as a way to cultivate democratic development and a democratic school culture

2019· article· en· W2991373521 on OpenAlex
Isolde de Groot, Bram Eidhof

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLondon Review of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyCitizenshipContext (archaeology)Democratic educationPolitical sciencePedagogyCitizen journalismPublic administrationSociologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Civic culturePublic relationsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last decades, many European Union countries have invested in strengthening participatory learning in citizenship education policy and practice. This survey study provides insight into how high school teachers in the Netherlands advance critical democratic citizenship and a democratic school culture in the context of mock elections. A quarter of the schools that organized mock elections in 2017 participated in the study. Analysis reveals that attention for critical, valuerelated teacher aims and teacher aims directed at strengthening a democratic school culture is still limited in mock election-related education. It also shows that half of the participating schools offer less than one hour of mock electionrelated educational activities, and that one-third of the teachers would like to offer additional educational activities.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.345 · 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