MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191755776 · doi:10.18224/educ.v24i0.9004

ANALYSIS OF THE SCHOOL PURPOSES OF A SCHOOL LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION TEXT FROM CHILE FROM THE LOOK OF THE COGNITIVE VALUE OF THE KNOWLEDGE PROPOSED

2021· article· en· W3191755776 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Educativa - Revista de Educação · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational theories and practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumValue (mathematics)StructuringGeneralizationCognitionMathematics educationProcess (computing)PedagogyPsychologySociologyComputer scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes a learning content analysis model proposed in a curriculum. It questions the educational purposes of a Chilean language and communication textbook based on Young's (2008; 2009) proposal regarding the cognitive value of knowledge that empowers students. The emancipatory objective of a school curriculum would result from the structuring and organization of said knowledge. What is knowledge that empowers? What are the intellectual activities in which the teaching of this knowledge involves students? In this contribution, we conceptualize knowledge that empowers by referring to the relationships between two processes of generalization of experience, as outlined by Vygotsky (1934/1997) in his discussion of the relationships between everyday concepts and scientific concepts. Although with important limitations, our data analysis highlights that in order to analyze the emancipatory potential of a school curriculum, it is necessary to take into account the way it organizes and structures knowledge. Throughout the article, we show that empowering knowledge is developed through teaching-learning activities that involve the person in a process of theoretical generalization. Finally, we highlight the contradictions between the emancipatory purposes that are announced by its designers and the way in which knowledge is organized and structured in the mother tongue teaching curriculum.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.333 · 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