Otherness in Pedagogical Theory and Practice: The Case of Roma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the topic of the inclusion of Roma children in education in Europe through an examination of theory and practice in relation to the issues of Otherness and foreignness. Roma children entering school encounter a vastly different world from their home culture, with different expectations for teaching and learning, for relationships among learners, and with teachers. We address the question of whether the knowledge of these contradictions or discontinuities and knowledge of the ways in which any child from a minority group learns, is sufficient to address the issue of foreignness in educational contexts. The paper highlights the potential for interculturalism and intercultural pedagogies for engaging children from diverse cultures. Cet article porte sur la question de l’inclusion des enfants roms dans le système éducatif en Europe et ce, par un examen de la théorie et la pratique par rapport aux questions de l’altérité et l’extranéité. Les enfants roms qui rentrent à l’école sont confrontés à un monde bien différent de celui de leur propre culture, où les attentes face à l’enseignement et l’apprentissage ne sont pas les mêmes que celles qu’ils connaissent, ni les rapports des apprenants entre eux et entre les apprenants et les enseignants. Nous nous demandons si la conscience de ces contradictions ou discontinuités et la connaissance des façons dont apprennent les enfants de groupes minoritaires suffisent pour aborder la question de l’extranéité dans des milieux éducatifs. L’article souligne le potentiel de l’interculturalisme et des pédagogies interculturelles pour stimuler la participation des enfants de diverses cultures.
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 | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.061 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".