MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332428145 · doi:10.1177/1052562915574724

Creating and Maintaining a Safe Space in Experiential Learning

2015· article· en· W2332428145 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganizational Behavior Teaching Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningSpace (punctuation)PopularityActive listeningContext (archaeology)PsychologyReflexivityExperiential educationSociologySocial psychologyPedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing popularity of experiential learning in management education raises a number of new opportunities and challenges for instructors, particularly with regard to shifting instructor roles and attention to learning through one’s emotions. In this article, we draw on psychodynamics—in particular D. W. Winnicott’s notions of “transitional space” and “holding”—to delineate what a safe space might look like in a management education context. We propose that experiential learning can result in deeper learning when conducted in such a space, which consists of appropriate physical aspects, trust, respect, suspension of judgment and censorship, a willingness to share, and high-quality listening. We further propose that a safe space can be developed and maintained by creating a strong container early on, establishing ground rules, providing lessons in listening and witnessing, teaching by example, and developing a reflexive attitude.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it