What Would Hegel Do? Desire and Recognition in the Pedagogical Relation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is about student participation in critical pedagogy. It is also about the anxiety that occurs in practice when the prompting of participation falls on deaf ears. It considers the way that students silence figures as a symptom in critical pedagogy, where it is taken as something that blocks learning and simultaneously a point on which on dialogue is potentiated. Drawing on Freud's concept of the uncanny and Hegel's master/slave dialectic, the discussion analyses that anxiety and suggests that beneath explicit emphasis on dialogue in critical pedagogy, there is also an implicit asymmetrical desire for recognition because the teacher relates to students' learning mediately, through their participation. I argue that student silence should not be regarded only as a problem of "non-work" to be overcome via pedagogical techniques; but rather, the anxiety it provokes offers two ways of responding. About the Author Dr. Amy Swiffen received her PhD from the Department of Sociology at the University of Alberta where she currently teaches social theory. Dr. Swiffen can be contacted at aswiffen@ualberta.ca
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it