Listening as Attending to the “Echo of the Otherwise”: On Suffering, Justice, and Education
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
Listening to stories of suffering can be difficult, painful, and even traumatic. \nYet listen we do and listen we must. If we do not hear or bear witness to these stories, \nthen we are rendered incapable of responding, of answering for our or other’s \nactions, of taking a position of responsibility. Thus listening is central to the ways \nin which educational projects of social justice are conceived. Within these projects \nthere is a legitimate focus on listening to the voices of the marginalized and the \nwounded, and on giving space and time to those groups to articulate their own \nexperiences, struggles, dilemmas, and needs. In the context of teaching and learning \nencounters, students are often exposed to narratives that offer them radically \ndifferent experiences from their own and when these experiences are marked by \nsuffering, their responses can cut across a range of emotional registers: solidarity, \npity, empathy, desire, identification, and guilt, to name a few. Such responses reveal \nsome of the ways students “receive” the other and the degree to which they become \nhosts, as it were, to the other’s narrative presence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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