Re-Situating Canadian Early Childhood Education (2014) Veronica Pacini-Ketchabaw & Larry Prochner, editors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blue Swadener, Lacey Peters, and Sonya Gaches.I mention the U.S. authors by name because the unfortunately misleading title, as well as the preface, introduction, and conclusion, had a negative impact on my perception of the work as a whole.The foreword, introduction, and concluding chapters are excellent examples of reconceptualist ECE scholarly work.The reconceptualist movement in ECE has, over the course of the last three decades, used critical, poststructural, postmodern, postcolonial, feminist, and post-humanist theories to uncover and challenge social inequity and injustices within ECE, politicizing the field and troubling dominant narratives.Unfortunately, these three chapters don't seem to belong in a book with the word Canadian in the title.The foreword, by two U.S. researchers, presents the field of reconceptualist or critical ECE studies, suggesting that "multiple universalisms . . .should be called into question" (p.xi) and that social power relations be unmasked.However, in tracing a history of this movement, these authors appear not to recognize their own U.S.-centric perspective.While they cite some authors from other Englishspeaking countries, such as Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, the tone of the chapter assumes that all readers either live in the United States or are familiar with that country's ECE practices, or lack thereof, making the call to de-centre traditionally marginalized knowledges appear hypocritical.The introduction, by the editors of the anthology (two prominent Canadian researchers), offers a similar history of the reconceptualist movement from a U.S. perspective, although these authors cite work from Sweden, as well.
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 | 0.011 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".