Stakeholders' appraisals of the school history curriculum in Zambia on social media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study attempted to capture stakeholders' views on the school history curriculum in Zambia. Stakeholders' views are an important aspect of curriculum development. Social media such as Facebook and WhatsApp have become platforms a section of Zambians uses to challenge the traditional education system. The study used a qualitative approach design by monitoring the e-comments of focus groups (teachers' forums) and individuals on Facebook on what some Zambians thought about the history curriculum. Social media was used because it provides an environment that removes traditional inhibitions of authority figures and meets people in their comfort zone, making them free to discuss otherwise sensitive topics. This research revealed that various stakeholders found the curriculum content irrelevant to the future they envisioned for themselves. The study additionally found that people in Zambia had been side-lined in discussions concerning curriculum development for history. People felt that they had been placed into the straitlaced role of consumers, and their feedback has never been sought. The study recommends revisiting the school history curriculum content to reflect stakeholders' needs and apply it to society. Curriculum developers should also pay attention to the voices of stakeholders in society.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".