MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392512039 · doi:10.1080/04250494.2024.2314581

Neither this nor that: the challenge of social justice for non-indigenous English teachers in First Nations Australian education contexts

2024· article· en· W4392512039 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tim Delphine, Glenn Auld, Julianne Lynch, Joanne O’Mara

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish in Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeakin University
KeywordsIndigenousLiteracyPedagogyIndigenous educationSociologySocial justiceEconomic JusticeSubject (documents)Political scienceSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines and critiques gap-based education policies that are based on statistical and reductive conceptualisations of success for First Nations students in Australia. The policy desire to achieve social justice underpinned by parity of outcomes across a range of life indicators (including standardised English literacy) between First Nations Australians and non-Indigenous Australians is embedded in programmatic approaches to pedagogy such as Accelerated Literacy (AL). We examine the experiences of Bruce, a teacher teaching English in the middle years of school in a school that mandated AL as a whole-of-school approach to English and literacy instruction. We show how intersecting notions of social justice can collide in the English classroom and how teachers in these contexts are in danger of re-colonising through English teaching practices that neither produce statistical improvement nor advance culturally responsive teaching based on giving primacy to Indigenous-authored texts in subject English.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0210.051
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0040.008
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.381 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish in EducationSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207