Deep Listening in a Feminist Popular Theatre Project: Upsetting the Position of Audience in Participatory Education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigating the participatory, collaborative, and conflictual character of learning within feminist coalitions was the focus of an interdisciplinary community-based project that used popular theatre as the methodology. Popular theatre, with its creative approach to analyzing, naming, and acting on problems and working creatively with conflict, created a unique opportunity to enrich and complicate one's understanding of deep listening—an embodied and active stand-point for speaking and listening across difference. This article outlines some of the deeper under-standings about feminist politics, theatre processes, and the creation of democratic sites of learning that emerged from this study. The authors focus on theatre processes that created new opportunities for high-risk storytelling and deep listening. Insights from this study can be applied to the learning processes of movements for social justice, particularly feminist coalitions, and to the ways the participatory process and democratic intent of adult education class-rooms are understood.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 it