MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7123147819 · doi:10.65264/jjsj9547

Article 4: Voices From Inside The Circle: The Walls To Bridges Collaborative Teaching And Learning Experience In Canada

2018· article· W7123147819 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer M. Kilty, Sandra Lehalle

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvancing Corrections Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningQualitative researchIndigenousSocial capitalHigher educationQualitative propertyPrison

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper offers a qualitative review of the authors’ experience co-teaching their first Walls to Bridges (W2B) course in Ontario, Canada. W2B is an educational program where post-secondary courses are taught inside correctional facilities; the student cohort consists of equal numbers of ‘inside’ students (prisoners) and ‘outside’ university students. The authors use inside and outside student journals as qualitative data to provide compelling testimonials of the benefits of this innovative educational initiative and to showcase the students’ voices. This article describes the importance of mobilizing Indigenous circle pedagogy to structure the course, which is exceptionally important in the Canadian context; the significance of recognizing the diverse voices in the circle; and the role of empathic listening and expressive speech to facilitating critical circle dialogue. We begin by outlining some of the main institutional barriers that need to be overcome to successfully run a W2B course and conclude with a review of some of the main benefits of this program for students and correctional staff alike – including, combatting inmate and staff stereotypes/codes, strengthening staff-prisoner relationships, increasing the inmate’s social and cultural capital by way of university level education, and building bridges between the prison and the community by way of institutional partnerships between the university and corrections and inside and outside student connection.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvancing Corrections JournalSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207