MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7029170128

An inquiry into the pedagogical practices of high school social studies teachers: Imagining and re-imagining becoming a teacher

2019· article· en· W7029170128 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueWinnSpace (University of Winnipeg) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaBrandon University
FundersMinistère de l'Énergie et des Ressources Naturelles
KeywordsPremiseSocial studiesEducational researchTeaching methodSocial lifeLived experience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On three days in 2017-18 two university professor-researchers gathered with three high school teachers to talk about the experience of teaching social studies and about the insights, questions, and wonderments therefrom derived. The intent was to research the life and work of social studies teachers. The gatherings were funded by the Brandon school division (Brandon is a small city in the southwestern Manitoba (Canada). The research was conducted under the auspices of the Manitoba Education Research Network (MERN) with support from Manitoba Education and Training (MET). The underlying premise was that teachers, through their lived experience in the classroom and beyond, were able to access understandings unique to teaching and learning. This article chronicles, in part, what one teacher revealed about his conception of being a social studies teacher and his teaching experience and how, thereby, the understanding of social studies teaching is increased and provides a signal as regards what it might be to be a social studies teacher.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWinnSpace (University of Winnipeg)Same topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and HegelFrench-language works237,207