Women teaching women: perspectives of Caritas Egypt adult literacy educators on their work and literacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conspicuous absence of the voices of adult literacy educators from countries located in Africa, Asia and Latin America has limited the possibilities of improving the practices of teaching literacy and educating the large populations of non-literate adults in countries such as Egypt where eighteen million currently reside.The present study aimed to present the perspectives of Upper Egyptian adult literacy educators associated with a Freirean based program run by Caritas Egypt on work and literacy.Caritas Egypt educators were selected because despite many difficulties, they have proven particularly effective in teaching other nonliterate women, although until the present study, this has not been studied systematically.Moreover, these educators continue to teach for many years.Why is that?The present study investigated the reasons they chose to be adult educators, the problems they faced in the course of their work, and why they nevertheless continued.The study was informed by the theoretical frameworks of New Literacy Studies and the writings of Paulo Freire.Both literacy and its teaching are social practices that are ideological, contextual and power-laden.The low status of adult literacy within the educational field is reflected in the low status of the adult literacy educators who normally receive little remuneration, training and support.Life history methodology was particularly suited to investigating participants in their own contexts and the different contextual and personal factors affecting the educators' choices and experiences.Thirty-two educators participated in small focus groups and ten were interviewed individually.The data was analyzed and presented thematically.In addition, the life histories of four individual educators with different personal characteristics were also presented.Most of the participants explained that they initially took the job because it was the only one they found however they have continued to work because they benefitted as much as they benefitted others.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".