Teaching for Democracy: The Risks and Benefits of Teaching in the Danger Zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Teaching as Revolutionary and Its Moral Implications The educator for liberation has to die as unilateral educator of educatees, in order to be born again as educator-educatee of educatees-educators. An educator is a person who has to live in deep significance of Easter. --Paulo Freire (1) I would like to explore notion of teaching as revolutionary, which I believe to be essential in building foundations of democratic citizenry. I am deeply concerned with idea that public sphere of education both limits, in a narrow fashion, discernable truth, and creates covert pressures on degree to which democratic teaching may be practiced. Set within context of pedagogy of democracy and transformation of Paulo Freire, I will argue that have a moral responsibility, both to their students and to their community, to empower their students in practice of democratic values. However, simply put, also have a moral and legal responsibility (as employees) to reflect and model to their students a particular community's values. What happens then when there is a disagreement over which values are right ones to commit to? In my opinion, a teacher is one who, in tradition of Freire, lives in deep significance of Easter; that is, as one who commits to role of an educator-educatee for educates-educators. According to Freire, this means that a revolutionary teacher is committed to practicing co-intentional education whereby, teachers and students (leadership and people), co-intent on reality, are both Subjects, not only in task of unveiling that reality, and thereby coming to know it critically, but in task of re-creating that knowledge. As they attain this knowledge of reality through common reflection and action, they discover themselves as its permanent re-creators. (2) A revolutionary teacher is, in this light, one who enables their students, through practice of democratic teaching, to have an active involvement in determining which values are right ones to commit to in a school community. Defining Democratic Teaching As I stated earlier, I feel that must fulfill a larger moral agency than just reflect a particular community's and school board's values. (3) In other words, it is my belief that a teachers' professional autonomy must be demonstrated through democratic teaching. For purposes of this paper, I define democratic teaching as a commitment to helping students discover and nurture their self-expression, develop consciousness, claim a new and ever-evolving awareness, as well as act on it. Whatever this new awareness is, it will be a result of unrestricted critical examination, the most distinguishing characteristic of a free society. (4) My own understanding of democracy and how it can best be taught is still evolving but what I have discovered is that it is most rewarding way for me to teach. I am a different person because teaching for democracy is something I do and am, both in and out of classroom. This type of transformative teaching requires a dedication to ideals of democracy that results in so much more than just teachers' submission to ruling status quo. It is my contention in this paper that it is moral imperative of to take a revolutionary stance (5) in their roles as educators or risk betraying themselves, their students and ideals of democratic teaching. (6) Democratic teaching is in fact a moral and not just a political imperative precisely because it goes beyond enhancing a school climate or enhancing students' self-expression and self-esteem. (7) School programs that focus solely on prescriptive measures (for example, character education movement as practiced in Ontario schools), (8) may end up looking like models of democracy but are really superficial band aid remedies for social 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 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 | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".