“Where do we find the time to do this?” Struggling Against the Tyranny of Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the past five years, the University of New Brunswick (UNB) Early Childhood Centre, working with childcare educators, has been researching, piloting, and developing curriculum materials and workshops for infants, toddlers, and other children. As we move in and out of university and daycare spaces where “people are not equally located” (Eyre, 2007, p. 99), our work is rifled with contradictions and ethical tensions. Out of this complex and contradictory landscape, we hear and ask many recursive questions. The question we problematize in this article is: Where do we find the time to do this? (Foucault, 1984; Marshall, 2007). Questions such as this incite experiments and interpretations that enliven and invigorate our pedagogical co-authorings in order to reimagine ourselves and our worlds (Olson, 2005). Our critical examination of experimentations and interpretations provoked through three communally produced texts uncovers how educators both slide into and disrupt cultural orientations toward individualism, deficit, and the tyranny of clock time.
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 | 0.014 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.089 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| 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".