MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7058431115

Native teaching methods : an exploration of the use of traditional practical knowledge in the classroom / by Ruby V. Farrell.

2017· other· en· W7058431115 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLakehead University
KeywordsQualitative researchInterpretation (philosophy)Traditional knowledgeTeaching methodNaturalistic observationField (mathematics)Research methodologyQualitative property
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores possible consistent patterns in the teaching methods of Native teachers in northwestern Ontario by examining their use of \ntraditional practical knowledge in the classroom. \nThe research was conducted in an isolated community of about three hundred residents. Qualitative naturalistic research methods were used in this field research, incorporating informal open-ended interviews, journals, and non-participant observation techniques in the data collection. The research focused on the Native teachers and their interaction with their Native students in the classrooms during a \ntime period of seven school days. The data analysis and interpretation was ongoing throughout the ten day research period. By describing and interpreting the non-verbal intuitive insights to culturally significant, subtle forms of expression in the classroom, the findings offer an insider's view to the practical knowledge of Native teachers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207