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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
Isolde de Groot, Bram Eidhof

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLondon Review of EducationSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207