Towards a ‘global educational justice’ research paradigm: cognitive justice, decolonizing methodologies and critical pedagogy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article challenges three predominant narratives on educational globalization—‘educational restructuring,’ ‘educational institutionalism,’ and ‘educational multilateralism’—and shows how they have largely failed to propose alternatives to the neoliberal order. I connect two disparate literatures—on educational globalization and anti‐globalization social movements—to argue that the alternative globalization movement performs global citizenship education through critical pedagogy, cognitive justice, and decolonizing methodologies. To arrive at a multi‐layered model of citizenship, what is needed is not only critical pedagogy, but a fundamental critique of the cognitive injustice inherent within the hegemonic neoliberal ideology by re‐asserting the diversity of value systems and restoring subjugated knowledges through alternative methodologies. Drawing upon my participant observation at the 2003 anti‐G8 Summit in France and anti‐World Trade Organization meeting in Mexico, as well as the fourth World Social Forum in India, I propose a new research program on global educational justice.
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 | 0.037 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.133 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".