Creating An “Invitational Classroom” In The Online Educational Milieu
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
Parker Palmer, a scholar who studied effective face-to-face teaching, introduced the term the “invitational classroom” (1993, p. 71). In particular Palmer emphasized that “an air of hospitality” facilitated an inviting educational environment (p. 71). Hospitality in Palmer’s words means “receiving each other, our struggles, our newborn ideas, with openness and care” (p. 74). Palmer concludes that both teachers and learners experience positive consequence when the class environment is invitational. This paper explores a category of innovative teaching strategies, called artistic pedagogical technologies (APTs) that facilitate the experience of an invitational classroom in online courses (Perry & Edwards, 2010). APTs are teaching strategies founded in the arts. APTs described in this paper include photovoice, parallel poetry, and conceptual quilting. A study of the effect of these APTs on graduate students and instructors from a Canadian online university is described. The data collection and data analysis processes used in the study are detailed. Both students and instructors found the online classroom environment changed in a positive way in part because of APTs. Research participants reported that APTs initiated, sustained, and enhanced interactions among students and between students and the instructors (Perry & Edwards, 2010). These findings are analyzed using Palmer’s concepts of hospitality and the invitational classroom and Wenger’s Social Theory of Learning (1990). Practical ideas for educators regarding the use of APTS in teaching and course design are reviewed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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