MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977754831 · doi:10.1177/1350507605049899

Ethical Dilemmas of Critical Management Education

2005· article· en· W1977754831 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Learning · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical management studiesCritical pedagogyCritical theorySociologyEngineering ethicsCritical thinkingPedagogyEpistemologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical management education (CME) raises ethical issues, some of which have been debated in the broader literature of critical pedagogy and others that are particular to the unique balance of critical learning within contexts of management studies. Three issues in particular are explored in this article: the problematic positionality of the critical educator, the potential fragmentation of student subjectivities, and the contradictions between management practice and critical teaching. These issues are presented as ethical dilemmas for which no clear response can be postulated that does not entail further problematic issues. Mindful of this slipperiness, the discussion presents pedagogical approaches drawn from critical education theory and the author's own classroom struggles, approaches that attempt to sustain critical intent alongside respect for student needs, in a pragmatic and flexible pedagogy that incorporates action with critical analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it