Reverberations of narrative inquiry: How resonant echoes of an inquiry with early school leavers shaped further inquiries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we draw on two Canadian narrative inquiries: the first study inquired into the experiences of youth who left school before graduating; the second study inquired into the experiences of Aboriginal youth and families in an urban junior high school. Our scholarly and personal interests intertwine in these two studies as we understand lives narratively, as unfolding, enfolding, nested compositions. The first narrative inquiry raised wonders for us about the experiences of many youth, but particularly Aboriginal youth, in schools. Out of these lingering wonders, we framed a second narrative inquiry into the educational experiences, both in and out of school, of youth and families of Aboriginal heritage. Our research puzzles were framed around collaboratively inquiring into the home/community/school experiences of Aboriginal youth and families and the ways that these experiences are shaped by cultural, social, historical, linguistic, and institutional narratives. Our intent in this methodological paper is not to show the results of either study but to show how inquiry threads from one study shape further narrative inquiries. In order to show the reverberations across the two studies, we pull forward some of study one and outline briefly the design and purposes of study two.
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 | 0.035 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".