An Invitation to Dialogue: Gadamer, Hermeneutic Phenomenology, and Critical Environmental Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper invites you, the reader, to co-produce meaning around the possibilities and limitations of what Gadamerian philosophy and hermeneutic phenomenology holds for environmental education research. Gadamerian philosophy and hermeneutic phenomenology is founded on the idea that people make meaning (the hermeneutic aspect) of lived experiences (the phenomenological aspect) through dialogue from a perspective where cognition is a product of a particular time and place. As such, this philosophy provided a solid foundation for a study which researched how five high school teachers made sense of, and engaged with, critical environmental education. This study evolved out of my belief that teachers' perceptions and practices have been marginalized, excluded, or forgotten in theoretical narratives of critical environmental education. In this paper I will share my experiences engaging with Gadamerian philosophy and hermeneutic phenomenology and introduce what I found to be the nature, limitations and possibilities of this research frame.
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 | 0.045 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.098 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.040 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".