MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416366161 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v19i5.10179

One Classroom at a Time: How Better Teaching Can Make College More Equitable

2025· article· en· W4416366161 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Xuechen Yuan, Segalit Abergel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUniversity Challenges and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumInclusion (mineral)ArchetypeElitePoliticsStyle (visual arts)Higher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

David Gooblar’s “One Classroom at a Time” is a practice-centred book on the pressing discussion on equity, diversity, and inclusion in higher education. The book opens with a powerful statement: “the majority of our existing curricula are designed for imaginary students” (Gooblar, 2025, p. 17). This notion of the “imaginary student,” described as ones who populate elite institutions and dominate the discussion on curriculum design and pedagogy, is deeply anchored throughout the book. In response to the long-standing archetype of fragmentation, competition, gatekeeping, and favouritism that dominate curricula and pedagogy, this thought-provoking book draws on evidence from psychological studies and historical analysis to challenge the practices of disembeddedness. The increasingly diverse student population in higher education underscores the need for educators, staff, and administrators to shift from a deep-rooted archetype to an identity-conscious pedagogy. With a writing style that is vivid, critical, accessible, and well informed by research and classroom experience, the author creates a book suitable for all audiences, providing actionable classroom suggestions, toolkits, and future recommendations. Amid today’s complex political climate, this book is an unapologetic defence of advocacy efforts for a more equitable education.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.016
Scholarly communication0.0200.023
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueJournal of Teaching and LearningSame topicUniversity Challenges and ReformsFrench-language works237,207