Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing upon the foundational principles of Imagination Creativity Education (ICE), our article examines the relational dimension in the context of classroom environments, as observed within the Canadian schooling system. We explore the landscape of a community of learnership – the lived and living practices of both students and teacher in the communal space in between, a space characterized as the transactional curriculum. We argue that teachers play a vital role in cultivating intentional relationships with students, one whose pedagogical responsibility focuses on establishing relationships, belonging, and dialogue; viewing students holistically for who they are and who they have the potential of becoming. Teachers who design such communities of learnership subscribe to pedagogical praxis, attending to their students’ lived curricula in which deep, engaged, and innovative learning is enacted. In this article, we outline the principles of ICE, through which a community of learnership can be forged. Grounded in Freire’s (1997) concept of gnoseologica of education, we expand on dialogic relationships that value curiosity, imagination, creativity, and innovation. We draw on one author’s Grade 8Footnote1 classroom inquiry to describe the lived experiences of an ICE community of learnership.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".