“I Thought This Course Was Going to Be Streamlined!”: The Limits of Normal and the Possibilities of Transgression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article offers an analysis of the parallels between neo-liberalism, epistemology, and pedagogy, specifically related to how neoliberal ideologies narrow the possibilities for considering transgressive sexualities. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) education encourages educators to consider queer lives and communities, and can do so in ways that leave intact or challenge dominant norms. Neoliberalism, an economic expression of liberalism, rests on ideologies that support privatization and a diminished notion of the public good. These ideologies can become intertwined with epistemological expectations in the classroom. Related to queer theory and pedagogy, neoliberalism can profoundly narrow the possibilities for queer subjecthood. Epistemological neoliberalism, or structures of knowing that endorse an often falsely rendered normality, can be active in the classroom. This article explores two comments students offered in courses on gender and communication to explore the ways in which neoliberal ideologies bear on epistemological and pedagogical practices in ways that profoundly narrow conceptions of the social and constitutions of the subject, particularly related to transgressive sexualities and queer lives.
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 | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".