Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation explores a model of social change which I have labeled "dialogic."Each of the three cases I have chosen for this study has been included because I believe that the design of each intervention departs significantly and creatively from traditional, less Other-oriented, social change efforts.Dialogic social change begins with the assumption that human beings cannot be developed, modernized, or empowered by external parties.Instead, this conception of change is guided by the assumption that individuals are autonomous, trustworthy beings who are capable of deciding when to engage with new ideas and opportunities for action.First, I analyze the strategic communication of the "Billionaires for Bush," a group of playful and ironic protesters, most active in New York City preceding the 2004 U.S. Presidential election.In this case I focus on the ability of the Billionaires to creatively inspire and invite civic participation, which resulted in the self-organization of more than 70 "spin off" Billionaires for Bush chapters.The second case I examine is "Scenarios from Africa," an HIV/AIDS-related communication process in Senegal centered on a script writing contest for young people implemented voluntarily by a vast network of community based organizations.I discuss how the contest promotes youth agency in Senegal, allowing contest participants to shift from their traditional role as targets of information campaigns to instead become creators of HIV prevention content.Finally, I present the "invitational" Cultura Ciudadana (civic culture) communication strategy employed by Antanas Mockus, the former mayor of iv Bogot Colombia.In the Bogot case I explore how the Mockus administration creatively promoted civic education and participation by, for example, distributing soccer refereetype cards to encourage citizens to replace violence and aggression with playful symbols when communicating with fellow citizens.Each of the cases involves a communication strategy designed to invite and inspire action, and each case is rooted in the notion that the Other should be respected and is a capable and potentially creative being.I aspire to affect practice by illustrating the process and outcome of three different social change interventions and by suggesting that the dialogic design of these interventions explains their generative potential -their ability to make action possible.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".