Case-study of a creative teacher
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alice, a secondary teacher from Quebec, Canada is the focal point of this qualitative case-study research. She is a Caucasian, 37 year-old, married woman with three children. Alice is selected for the following reasons: primarily, she is a science teacher, who has received a provincial award Prix de merite de la conservation de la faune for a project, that is a demonstration of creativity in her field. Secondarily, I share many attributes with her including being married with children, and being a science teacher. Data were gathered from July, 1998 to July, 2001. Data sources included five one-to-one interviews with Alice. Additional data sources included one interview with June (mentor-colleague) and Jane (Departmental Head); two classroom observations; 1996 retrieved interview; and artifacts of students' work. All interviews were audio-taped verbatim and then transcribed, and observations videotaped. The overarching themes represented constructs involving community, values, and interpersonal skills. Alice's values, her bent towards community, and her way of life in constructing interpersonal relationships contribute to her creative teaching. Alice's philosophy of grounding education in the community determines who she is, and encompasses her creative process which begins with recycling of community resources and giving back to the community through the creative products developed by her students. Her values guide her practice and teaching decisions. This case study of creative teaching highlights the domain of teaching as different from those addressed by studies on creative giants and presents an inspirational model for individuals in the teaching profession.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".