MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401036676 · doi:10.1177/13621688241262618

‘Un futuro mejor para todos’: Towards a critical humanizing English language teaching

2024· article· en· W4401036676 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Teaching Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Research Foundation for English Language Education
KeywordsPedagogyCurriculumCritical pedagogyFocus groupInjusticeThematic analysisCritical ethnographySociologyEthnographyCohesion (chemistry)PsychologyPoliticsUnrestQualitative researchSocial scienceSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During more than 50 years of socio-political unrest in Colombia, extreme violence has profoundly affected marginalized students in public schools. Although these topics have been mainly addressed by history and social studies teachers, English language teaching (ELT) has paid little attention to addressing issues of social injustice in the class. To fill this gap, this critical ethnography looks at how a social justice curriculum has been used in ELT classes to empower students to learn skills that allow them to discuss the violence that occurs both inside and outside of the school environment. The fieldwork was carried out in a public high school for eight months, in Bogotá (the capital of the country) with three English teachers and their young students. Data was collected through focus groups, interviews and classroom observations and then analysed using thematic analysis. The findings of the study revealed that the activities suggested by the teachers proposed a change in teaching pedagogies toward solving social problems in students’ communities. The findings further suggest that a negotiated curriculum with the students fosters a critical humanizing pedagogy that promotes social cohesion, and as a consequence improves language learning.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.341 · 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