Pedagogical Tools for Peacebuilding Education: Engaging and Empathizing With Diverse Perspectives in Multicultural Elementary Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study used classroom observations, teacher and student interviews, and document analysis to examine the degree to which peacebuilding dialogue processes were implemented in 3 elementary school classrooms and how diverse students, particularly newcomer immigrants, experienced these pedagogies. The study critically examines how ethnocultural minority immigrant students aged 9 to 13 responded to conflictual issues pedagogies and discussions and how such pedagogies facilitated inclusive spaces for all students to participate in the curricula. The study’s results show that when content was explicitly linked to students’ identities and experiences, opportunities for democratic peacebuilding inclusion increased. In this research, diverse students’ classroom participation was influenced by various peacebuilding pedagogies, particularly when teachers engaged with conflictual issues in ways that encouraged students to develop acceptance and empathy for other perspectives. Using peacebuilding dialogue pedagogies to guide curriculum engagement with alternative viewpoints may contribute to diverse students’ inclusion in the classroom.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".