MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083613805 · doi:10.33524/cjar.v20i3.466

Exploring the Impact of Critical Pedagogy: Do Preservice Teachers Develop Critical Consciousness when Taught by Critical Pedagogues?

2020· article· en· W3083613805 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Barbara Pollard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Action Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical consciousnessConsciousness raisingConsciousnessAction researchPedagogyCritical pedagogyParticipatory action researchPsychologyCritical theoryTeacher educationRaising (metalworking)Mathematics educationSociologyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study utilized participatory action research and grounded theory methods and methodology to explore how critical pedagogy, as practiced by a small group of university education professors, shapes and influences the development of a critical consciousness among preservice teachers. Although there were some ‘conscious raising’ learning experiences, which are highlighted in this paper, the majority of preservice teachers exited the program with limited levels of critical consciousness. This paper discusses some of the pedagogical practices that hindered and enhanced preservice teacher conscious raising as well as the exit data which conveyed three variant levels of critical consciousness.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.434
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.093 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Action ResearchSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207