MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389117177 · doi:10.55016/ojs/ajer.v66i2.61794

Patterns and Themes in Canadian Picture Books Published in 2017: A Content Analysis of 132 Titles Using Dresang’s Lens of Radical Change

2020· article· en· W4389117177 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Beverley Brenna, Irteqa Khan, Miranda Morstad

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsSaskatoon City HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReadabilityIndigenousSample (material)Content analysisDiversity (politics)Ethnic groupContent (measure theory)Picture booksSociologySocial sciencePsychologyMedia studiesLinguisticsLiteratureAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This comprehensive examination of 132 picture books originally published by Canadian publishers in 2017, and written and/or illustrated by at least one creator living in Canada, offers qualitative and quantitative findings that demonstrate patterns and themes in relation to number of titles, authors, illustrators, characters, genres, audiences, and readability characteristics, while addressing particular elements of Dresang’s (1999) notion of Radical Change. Books were identified from multiple sources with results compared to a previous study (Author 3), demonstrating a marginal increase of titles since 2015 where 120 books were identified, and a continued increase from 2005 where 57 books were identified. Of particular note in the current sample were the 13 books created by Indigenous authors and/or illustrators and presenting Canadian Indigenous content and perspectives, calculated at 9.8 % of the study sample, compared to previous results where books by Indigenous authors and/or illustrators comprised 3.5 % of the sample in 2005 and 10% in 2015. These findings, and other patterns, themes and possible trends, are suggested as underpinnings for future research involving further changes in the field of Canadian children’s literature in education as well as further research into reader response regarding contemporary titles. While this paper does address aspects of diversity present in this study sample, a second article disseminates detailed findings related to representations of ethnicity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0170.034
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.529
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.046 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207