Engagement through Emancipation, Empowerment, and Equity: Heutagogy and the 21st-Century Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low student engagement has become a problem for Engagement Academy (a pseudonym), as well as for most schools in Newfoundland and Labrador. Data indicates that approximately 70% of graduating students are disengaged and feel their educational experience is not adequately preparing them for life in the 21st-century. Issues related to student engagement reflect the failure of the province’s school system to adapt to societal trends and remain relevant in the 21st-century. Although a 21st-century workforce values competencies such as creativity, critical-thinking, and collaboration, traditional school systems value and reward compliance and conformity. Worse, a critical examination of traditional education systems reveals that many school structures preserve and perpetuate systemic inequities that harm its most marginalized students. This organizational improvement plan employs a humanistic lens that draws upon instructional, transformational, servant, and distributed leadership models that emancipate students from the oppressive structures of traditional schools. The implementation of classroom practices based on heutagogy and the adoption of the pedagogy-andragogy-heutagogy continuum is presented as a strategy to engage Grade 7–9 students in a 21st-century educational environment. Kotter’s eight-step model for organizational change and cycles of collaborative inquiry guides teachers through the change process. The concerns-based adoption model provides a framework for developing the change vision, identifying resistance factors, and monitoring change implementation. Klein’s communication model and Lewis’s stakeholder communication help to create a communication plan for the OIP.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".