Drawing on Derrida: Aesthetic Practice as a Displacement of Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maxine Greene describes the Deweyan “moment of consummation” that precedes “the elaboration [and] discovery of the new” as defining aesthetic experience. For John Dewey, an experience that is aesthetic “possesses internal integration and fulfillment reached through ordered and organized movement.” My interest, however, is in the nature of an aesthetic that is characterized by disjunction and dissonance, which can be termed a disruptive aesthetic. In this regard, Jacques Derrida’s conception of the supplement’s “cumulating function” that generates a multitude of signifiers, at times confounding in their relation to what has been apprehended and imagined, provides a productive reference point from which to begin to consider how, and in what form, aesthetic education is important to teacher education. I argue that inserting the arts as an aesthetic supplement (in a Derridean sense) to curriculum in teacher education opens up opportunities to learn about the nature of pedagogy and its capacity to “address the discursive process of producing knowledge and the strategies for interpreting the knowledges that can and cannot be produced.” At the dialogic intersections of knowledge production and interpretation, the potential offered by the aesthetic supplement is for learners to become personally implicated in constructing knowledge. As they do so, the insights and understandings that emerge for them from encounters provoked by the intervention of the aesthetic supplement have significant implications for their own pedagogical practices.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".