MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094054589 · doi:10.15760/nwjte.2020.15.2.4

Are they safe? Are they fed?: Reimagining inclusion in schooling during a pandemic

2020· article· en· W3094054589 on OpenAlexaff
Teresa Anne Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueNorthwest Journal of Teacher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University of Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicInclusion (mineral)MetaphorHappeningCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologySocial justicePedagogyNew normalPsychologySocial scienceHistoryMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper, using the method of currere, offers a rendering of the relationship between technology, inclusion, and social justice within education amid a walking through of Roy's Pandemic as a Portal metaphor. Educators are sitting in a critical moment to which pedagogic approaches can shift from educators responded to students assumed needs towards students expressed needs as we are seeing happening during the global pandemic.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.031
Scholarly communication0.0120.016
Open science0.0020.022
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorthwest Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207