A community perspective on literacy education in the inner city: an analysis of revisioning inner city and communityLINK resources in Vancouver schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The policy recommendation document, Revisioning Inner City and CommunityLINK Resources in Vancouver Schools, is explored in this research by applying critical discourse analysis methods. The document focuses on the need to "revision" school resources in the inner city district of East Vancouver, which is considered to be Canada's poorest postal code. This thesis concentrates in particular on how literacy is conceptualized throughout the text, both implicitly and explicitly. This research brings attention to the ways textual forms of governance in the school system are used to reinforce and reproduce dominant ideologies of how literacy is understood and shaped in educational discourses. The conceptual framework of New Literacy Studies is drawn upon to extend and unpack how literacy is positioned in the policy document. A personal narrative is woven throughout this analysis as a way to reflect on and bring attention to community perspectives, which often can be overlooked in discussions of policy making. Key words: literacy, new literacy studies, critical discourse analysis, policy
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".