Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The post-modern curriculum, drawing on chaos and complexity theory, recognises the realities of a world in flux and posits that the teacher and the class are always teetering in the midst of chaos, 'not linked by chains of causality but [by] layers of meaning, recursive dynamics, non-linear effects and chance' (Osberg 2008, viii). The phenomenon of such (paradoxically) 'constant' change is a living part of the realisation of Everyday Theatre company performances that are, in turn, specifically designed to effect shifts or changes in understanding for their audience participants. It is this changing, changeful, changeable, change-ringing context that we investigate in this article as we look at the layering of the experiences of Everyday Theatre through the lens of a post-modern curriculum of complexity. For us, the work of Everyday Theatre exemplifies the post-modern curriculum at its best, confirming what we as drama educators have intuited: a rich pedagogy unfolds in the midst of chaos as students meet a complex narrative that creates powerful metaphors they are invited to explore through their own acts of experience. Keywords: complexitypost-modern curriculumtheatre in health educationnarrative inquirypedagogy Notes 1. The title for this chapter comes from Alfred North Whitehead (1929) who wrote about 'examination knowledge' as a producer of 'inert ideas' that could only lead to the 'demise of "curiosity, of judgment, of the power of mastering a complicated tangle of circumstances"' (cited in Doll Citation1993, 146). Although 'complications' are different from 'complexity' in that complications can be untangled while complexity simply is, we consider the title to be a fine bridge between our previous difficulties with traditional curriculum and our new understanding of the beautiful fit between drama education and complexity curricula. Who knew?! 2. Encarta English World Dictionary (2009). 3. We rely on William Doll Jr.'s clear and readable book on a new curriculum for this century. There are few texts yet on complexity theory and education but, happily, Bill and his wife Donna were sharing Juliana's house and so we did not have far to go to reach the source. We are extremely grateful for Bill's close reading of this article, for the conversations, insights and suggestions. We were honoured to be considered members of that feedback loop!
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".