MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4327520728 · doi:10.1163/9789004532793_003

Classroom Ecologies That (Re)Claim a Democratic Commons

2022· book-chapter· en· W4327520728 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Melissa Riley Bradford, Michio Okamura

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisDialogicCommonsValue (mathematics)DemocracySociologyPedagogyPhilosophy for ChildrenEpistemologyMathematics educationPoliticsPolitical sciencePsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the application by two teachers of Daisaku Ikeda’s perspective of creative coexistence and Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s philosophy of value-creating pedagogy to foster diverse, non-hierarchical, and collaborative school communities that (re)claim a democratic commons. Structured around and embedded in the local community as a site for student direct observation and apperception of causal relations, Makiguchi’s value-creating pedagogy is a praxis of social and “epistemological empowerment” (Goulah & Gebert, 2009, p. 127) whereby children transform from dependent, to independent, to interdependent contributors of value. As scholar-practitioners who seek to apply these notions, one of us in a K-8 urban classroom, and the other in a democratically run Sudbury school, the authors employ Ikeda’s dialogic approach as a research methodology to investigate the tension between value creation, creative coexistence, and the pragmatic realities of school communities existing in oppressive, neoliberal times. Through our curated dialogue, we interrogate our classroom praxis as it relates to the creation of classroom community ecologies for diversity, sustainability, and democracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.113 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies→French-language works237,207→