Interpretation, meaning-making, and civic engagement at Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using qualitative methodology, this study investigated interpretation, meaning-making, and civic engagement at Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site. Based upon constructivist learning theory, the research focused on eight research questions including: 1) What memories do visitors recall from their visit to CHSNHS? 2) What kind of knowledge do visitors remember? 3) Are visitors making meaningful connections to the resource? 4) What meanings are visitors making? 5) How are the meanings made? 6) Are these meanings connected to civic engagement? 7) What types of citizens are visitors to Central High School NHS? 8) Longitudinal changes in knowledge, meaningful connections, and how meanings were constructed?;Visitors exhibited four types of memories: declarative, experiential, episodic and structural, and five different types of knowledge: declarative, experiential, episodic, structural and socio-cultural. Visitors made meaningful connections which were cognitive and emotional, which were both positive and negative, and these meanings were made through evaluation, establishment, personal experience, absolute description, and special knowledge. Visitors participated in various community activities, but their knowledge and feeling about the site did not translate into action. There were six passive citizens, seven active, and four civically engaged citizens. Longitudinally, there were increases in types of knowledge, changes in meaningful connections, and differences in how meanings were made. Future research should focus on the role of churches in civic engagement and conversations with others when investigating interpretation, meaning-making, and civic engagement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 teacher head, 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".