Bibliographic record
Abstract
All teaching and learning experiences exist within a complexity of contexts which impact those experiences in a myriad of observable and unobservable ways. This article discusses how an example of a specific contemplative pedagogy appears to have nurtured an emergent community of learning and praxis in the context of a Master of Education (MEd) classroom. Specifically this pedagogy encouraged the members of the classroom community to explore whom they are, how they exist in the world, and the effects of their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors on the relationships and contexts within which they are situated. This exploration occurred within an emergent holistic frame of reference, which overtly acknowledged and appreciated the complexity inherent in human existence. Pedagogical practices including the experiential teaching of contemplation, deep and authentic presence and engagement (both within the community itself and with a range of traditional, modern, and pioneer texts 1 ), and dialogue were used on a regular basis. This article describes, both, the design of the course and the contemplative pedagogy used in the classroom. It also describes how this design and pedagogy not only appeared to affect a profound change for some within the classroom community, but also how this change subsequently influenced the epistemological and ontological understandings of these students.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".