“To Remember Is to Live Again”: Geragogical Approaches to Online Storytelling With Older Immigrants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seeing aging not solely as a biological process but as a meaning-making practice, this paper presents findings from an exploratory study conducted within a community-based organization’s transition to online educational programming during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study aimed to explore how collaborative storytelling functioned as a geragogical practice in an online setting . The study involved 17 Spanish-speaking older immigrants in co-designing an age- and culturally responsive online storytelling curriculum. Through creative and reflective prompts, the virtual sessions facilitated autoethnographic and collaborative storytelling on a range of topics. Thematic analysis identified three interrelated themes in participants’ experience: connection in a time of isolation; anti-ageist reclamation; and temporal transcendence. Participants revisited and reinterpreted personal histories, reclaimed a sense of creative authorship, and envisioned new forms of community participation. The paper offers practical strategies for co-designing storytelling activities in community-based learning environments.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".