Book Review: Enacting Anti-Racist and Activist Pedagogies in Teacher Education: Canadian Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The word equity has been used increasingly in teacher education in the context of describing the importance of educating future teachers about diversity, justice, and closing the current gaps amongst equity deserving children (Cochran-Smith & Keefe, 2022).In my work with students during their practicum placements, we engage with concepts surrounding issues of equity as they relate to their practice as student teachers.As a teacher educator, I am always looking for resources I can share with my students to help them navigate this critical element of their education.Vesely et al. (2023) created a tool that can be used in teacher education to build upon the instructor's capacity to engage in critical reflective practice surrounding their students' backgrounds, the sources used, and content being taught, the classroom learning environment as well as the ways students are assessed.Kulkarni et al. (2023) have formulated a much needed pedagogical framework for teacher educators centering on disability, critical race theory, and culturally sustaining pedagogies while centering the work of disabled activists and scholars of poverty in the United States.I was hard pressed to find a current text which approaches these areas of study from a Canadian perspective.While texts such as Belle's Start with Radical Love: Antiracist pedagogy for social justice educators address anti-racist pedagogies, it does not specifically address the challenges faced by teacher educators when engaging in Book Review: MacKinnon xxxii
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".