MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479326373 · doi:10.1080/19409052.2016.1195426

Unconscious ties that bind – attending to complexes in the classroom: part 2

2016· article· en· W2479326373 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Fidyk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Jungian Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnconscious mindArgument (complex analysis)PsychologyCollective unconsciousSocial psychologySoulAffect (linguistics)PsychoanalysisEpistemologyDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Continuing the argument from Part 1, regarding the cultural unconscious and cultural complexes, a case is made for the significance of attending to the unconscious in the classroom. Understanding of cultural and familial complexes and the way parental psychology gets replayed within schools aims to bring greater awareness to the psychology of group life. Here specific attention is given to the family unconscious, family complexes, family soul, and the ancestors – both personal and archetypal. A method borrowed from family constellation work and rooted in African traditions of healing is outlined. This method is offered in an effort to unlock unconscious familial patterns whereby the emergence of new images may not only contribute to healing but also might have long-term effects on learning. Transgenerational patterns shaped by traumatic experiences, life events, cultural and environmental factors affect students, and so their learning. Parallel findings in epigenetics are also considered to be able to better contribute in long-lasting ways to resolving conflict, as well as to understanding deeper issues affecting our relations within education.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Jungian StudiesSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207