Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this autobiographical narrative inquiry, I continued to make sense of a Deweyan-inspired narrative conception of hope (LeMay, 2014). I started with a remembered story that occurred on a First Nation shortly after I commenced working at a post-secondary institution. Following that, I shared stories that led me to wonder about a Deweyan-inspired narrative conception of hope and then what I learned in a dissertation with two teachers as we worked with a Deweyan-inspired narrative conception of hope. From there, I unpacked the remembered story, using the three learnings that resonated in my sensemaking with the two teachers. Lastly, I reflected on how this inquiry inspired me to continue to make sense of students’ storied experiences of working with a narrative pedagogy of hope (LeMay, 2014) in relation to their well-being. Key words: a narrative conception of hope, narrative inquiry, autobiographical narrative inquiry, hope-focused practices and strategies, making hope visible and accessible Dans cette enquête narrative autobiographique, j'ai continué à donner du sens à une conception narrative de l'espoir inspirée par Dewey (LeMay, 2014). J'ai commencé par me souvenir d'une histoire qui s'est produite sur une Première Nation peu après que j'ai commencé à travailler dans un établissement postsecondaire. Ensuite, j'ai partagé les histoires qui m'ont amenée à m'interroger sur une conception narrative de l'espoir inspirée par Dewey, puis ce que j'ai appris dans le cadre d'une dissertation avec deux enseignants alors que nous travaillions avec une conception narrative de l'espoir inspirée par Dewey. Ensuite, j'ai décortiqué l'histoire dont je me souviens en utilisant les trois apprentissages qui ont résonné dans ma recherche de sens avec les deux enseignants. Enfin, j'ai réfléchi à la façon dont cette enquête m'a inspirée pour continuer à donner du sens aux expériences narratives des élèves qui travaillent avec une pédagogie narrative de l'espoir (LeMay, 2014) en relation avec leur bien-être. Mots-clés : une conception narrative de l'espoir, une enquête narrative, une enquête narrative autobiographique, des pratiques et des stratégies axées sur l'espoir, rendre l'espoir visible et accessible
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".