MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6990078743

CONFIDENT HEALTHY ACTIVE ROLE MODELS: Blending Teaching Personal & Social Responsibility (TPSR) and Arts-based education with Underserved Youth

2016· other· en· W6990078743 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrivingGeneral partnershipSocial responsibilityContext (archaeology)CurriculumMoral responsibilityTeaching methodActive learning (machine learning)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Teaching Personal & Social Responsibility model espoused by Hellison (2011) has immense fluidity in its applications and methods. This suggests that it would have potential as a partner with an equally fluid approach, Artography informed arts-based education. It is this partnership that animates this project. Using a qualitative, hermeneutic, constructivistic lens and a case study approach, this study’s multiple levels of analysis across several data sets yielded findings suggesting synergies between the life skills framework TPSR and Artography-informed arts-based education and how these synergies are used effectively when teaching a blend of TPSR and arts-based approaches in the context of the Confident Healthy Active Role Models (CHARM) program. The findings demonstrate that the synergies between the two frameworks can be used effectively in the CHARM program to support participants and students in learning and thriving in an environment that values the needs of the individual balanced with the needs of the collective.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University)→French-language works237,207→