MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411850575 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-87136-8_2

Relational Pedagogies for Later-Life Learning as Participation

2025· book-chapter· en· W4411850575 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Cossette, Andrea Creech, Sébastien Boucher, Aimée Gaudette-Leblanc, Mariane Generale, JoAnn Lee, Colin Enright

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité du Québec à MontréalMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter explores the idea of relational pedagogy and its relevance within contexts for later-life learning and participation. Example vignettes, drawn from a case study project carried out within a retirement community, illustrate some facets of a relational pedagogy, including the challenges to relationality that were experienced when the group pivoted to an online context during the COVID-19 pandemic.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Education and Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207