Co-Cultural Identities of Thai-Lao: A Guideline for Cultural Curriculum Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the Thai-Lao co-cultural identities and develops guidelines for integrating these identities into cultural studies curricula. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 14 stakeholders in education and cultural preservation from both the Kingdom of Thailand and Lao PDR. Thematic analysis was employed to interpret the data, focusing on historical, literary, and belief systems that characterize Thai-Lao co-cultural identities. The findings highlight key aspects of these identities and propose a curriculum framework that addresses cognitive, psychomotor, and affective learning domains. This framework is designed to enhance students’ understanding of their cultural heritage and to foster intercultural competence. The study contributes to the fields of cultural studies and education by offering insights into the integration of co-cultural identities into educational practices, promoting a richer, more inclusive educational experience.
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 | 0.088 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".