Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigates the changes in knowledge, attitudes and actions related to teachers’ unions and the defense of public education that emerge for workshop facilitators through participation in the Peru Project, a solidarity initiative of the British Columbia Teachers’ Federation and the Peruvian national teachers’ union. Interpretivist, feminist and decolonizing epistemologies guided this qualitative research, which considered learning through the theoretical lenses of Social Movement Unionism, Social Movement Learning and Libertarian Education. Thematic analysis was applied to examine data collected from semi-structured interviews with three Peruvian and three British Columbian Peru Project workshop facilitators. The degree to which Peru Project participation contributed to participants’ increased awareness of threats to public education, improved attitudes towards their unions, and increased engagement in activities in defense of public education differed between British Columbian and Peruvian participants. A number of factors contributed to these variations, including the nature and scope of learning opportunities provided during the Peru Project, support for democratic member participation, participants’ awareness of project goals, and their pre-existing perceptions of public education and their union. Application of recommendations based on these findings could improve the outcomes of the Peru Project and similar solidarity projects and allow participants to engage more fully in Social Movement Unionism. Findings suggest the advantage of delivering professional development through teachers’ unions’ international solidarity programs as well as the potential of such projects to contribute to a wide scale movement in defense of public education.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".