Global & multicultural influences on social studies curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We live in a world marked by constant change. We are linked in time, place and space to individuals around the globe. In a country as culturally diverse as Canada it is inevitable that issues of globalization and multiculturalism surface in educational realms. As educators it is imperative that we provide our students with opportunities to explore global and multicultural concepts as they impact them on local and international levels. The study of these concepts lends itself more easily to social studies curricula. Thus, an examination of Saskatchewan social studies curricula at the middle level over a period of time (1978- 1999) served as a tool to determine the impact globalization and multiculturalism have had on the curriculum. The review of the literature revealed the following issues: both global and multicultural education are difficult to define, resulting in difficulty implementing both these concepts in the classroom. Both concepts became more prominent in Canada during the 1970s and 1980s. While globalization and multiculturalism are different concepts, they do contain commonalities. These commonalities were used to determine the impact globalization and multiculturalism have had on the curriculum. Four main stages were found to exist that describe the common elements of the two concepts: equality, awareness, critical response and empowerment. Content analysis methodology was used to accurately interpret the curriculum documents that were analyzed, while grounded theory served as a framework for conducting the research. Key word counts were performed, followed by an examination of the word in the context it was placed in. Once examinations of all the curricula were conducted for each grade and year separately they were analyzed individually and then together. The findings revealed the following themes: the 1978 curriculum was not influenced by globalization and multiculturalism, and while the 1987/88 and 1999 curricula do embrace elements of globalization and multiculturalism they only do so in certain stages of the model- mainly awareness and equality. In the conclusion, implications on education and suggestions for future research are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 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".