Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines social constructions of the gendered teacher as determined by discourses, an area of research in need of further investigation. Specifically, this study identifies and critically examines gendered discourses that surround a group of elementary school teachers in Southern Ontario. Eighteen elementary school teachers including eleven females and seven males volunteered to participate in in-depth interviews. Their responses are analyzed along with three types of education documents: Ontario's Education Act; issues of the Ontario College of Teachers' magazine, Professionally Speaking; and issues of the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario's publication, Voice. Through the perspective of feminist poststructural theory, gendered discourses of elementary teaching are identified and their influence on teachers' work-related experiences is illuminated. Five gendered discourses emerge from an analysis of the data: patriarchy, men as 'inappropriate' teachers, the need for more men teachers, school as an extension of home and women as 'natural' teachers. This study illustrates how these gendered discourses work to limit and homogenize the experiences, social relations, practices and identities of male and female elementary school teachers, respectively. The wider implications of these discourses for the role of the gendered teacher are discussed. These gendered discourses are deconstructed to reveal their conflicts and inconsistencies and show how they act upon the subjectivities of teachers. Recommendations are made for creating spaces in which alternative and more inclusive discourses can be (re)invented that reflect the diverse realities of teachers. Implications for theory and further research also are considered.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".