Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary: Materials and methods of teaching embody a particular relationship between some of the members of a given culture and society and its young people. Educators may not be aware of the process in which they are engaged, and may believe that they are carrying out only particular activities such as teaching maths, reading, science and the like. In Australian schools, Aboriginal children are usually taught by European Australians, and ordinary problems are magnified by social inequality and cultural difference. The materials and methods of teaching in use sometimes assume this relationship to be one of disadvantage/advantage, and then the methods used resemble those for slow learners and other disadvantaged students; in other cases, these attitudes are mixed with a recognition of cultural difference as a variable to be considered; others— and these are few — derive from Aboriginal assertiveness, and attempts are made to teach within a framework of assumptions about cultural equality and independence. The picture is further complicated by the situations in which Black-White relationships arise: in particular the long-occupied areas where language and the original culture have been deeply transformed, areas where language and recognizably traditional ways exist but the land has been alienated, and areas where the land is held and language and religious life flourish. The methods of teaching and the materials used express various forms of the relationship between Blacks and Whites, and hence are likely to undergo rapid transformation when these relationships change.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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.
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".