Bringing Curriculum Down to Earth: The Terroir That We Are
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
In this essay, the authors outline theoretical and practical considerations that arise out of their autobiographical curricular research into place, identity, and food. Regarding the quintessential curricular questions, What is worth knowing? and How do we come to know?, they posit that an attention to how we eat and use the world (Berry, 1990) is a curricular endeavor. As such, they understand their work here as an acknowledgement of embodied or somatic and visceral, sensual knowing, a celebration of and attunement to the everyday experiences in human lives. The notion of terroir is explored as one possible approach to "bringing curriculum down to earth" and to dwell in the humus (Aoki, 1991/2005) we share with other living things. Along with a series of six vignettes that illustrate how food and place have influenced their identities and vice versa, the authors offer the reader, by way of sidebars, some of the strategies that have transformed their praxis when working towards an educational philosophy and curriculum that honours terroir not only as a theoretical or conceptual idea/ideal but also as a viable and sensual embodied practice. In this format, the essay mixes abstract theoretical discussion with examples of concrete praxis. The authors suggest that this mixing is an important and necessary curricular endeavour for
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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