MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056074488

Elementary School Teachers’ Lived Experiences of Teaching Nutrition: A Qualitative Study

2024· article· en· W7056074488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicThermal properties of materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative researchLived experiencePerceptionLifelong learningFace (sociological concept)Semi-structured interviewNutrition EducationResource (disambiguation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early nutrition education is crucial for lifelong health and learning (Cusick et al., 2016). Elementary schools and teachers play a significant role in shaping children's understanding of nutrition (Cotton et al., 2020). Yet, there's limited research on teachers' experiences teaching nutrition to elementary students and how it affects their well-being. This qualitative study examines 13 Ontario-based teachers' experiences in delivering nutrition education. Interviews revealed themes such as teachers' perceptions of their role and secondly challenges and facilitators in teaching nutrition, including time constraints, resource scarcity, body image, and cultural differences. These findings offer insights into the complexities teachers face in imparting this vital skill to children. The research aims to support teachers and promote positive change in education, fostering classrooms of positivity, impartiality, and acceptance. Ultimately, it strives for each student to embrace their dietary preferences, understand their culinary heritage, and envision their future selves, fostering inclusivity and enriching learning environments.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicThermal properties of materialsFrench-language works237,207