MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W576450201 · doi:10.2307/1602163

Narratives in the Making: Teaching and Learning at Corktown Community High School

2005· article· en· W576450201 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Helen Christiansen, Mary Beattie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePedagogyMathematics educationSociologyPsychologyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At Corktown Community High School in Toronto, importance is placed on the education of the whole person. An alternative secondary school, it emphasizes the development of self-knowledge and responsiveness to others, creative and critical thought, and connectedness through the self, the school community, and society. Narratives in the Making is based on a research project carried out at the school as part of a large scale national research study, The Exemplary Schools Project. Corktown (a pseudonym) was selected as a participant in this study because of its unusually high rate of student retention, student engagement, achievement, and success. Using narrative accounts of classroom and school practices, profiles of teachers and students, and language that is accessible to both practitioners and academics, Mary Beattie provides insights and explanations of the meaning of success as it is understood by Corktown teachers, students, parents, alumni, and school administrators. She shows how the whole person concept is incorporated into the school environment, and why relationships are at the heart of teaching and 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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0460.029
Scholarly communication0.0140.006
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducationSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207