MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561660068 · doi:10.22582/ta.v6i0.432

The Disorienting Dilemma in Teaching Introductory Anthropology

2016· article· en· W2561660068 on OpenAlex
T. F. McIlwraith

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

VenueTeaching Anthropology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningDilemmaSociologyEpistemologyField (mathematics)PedagogyPsychologyPhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses Jack Mezirow’s concept of the disorienting dilemma to discuss opportunities in anthropological teaching to transform student beliefs. It compares the connections between classroom instruction in cultural relativity, a core concept in cultural anthropology, and field-based anthropology experiences related to the same concept. Drawing on examples from my classroom and from a research-oriented field school, my observations suggest that while students are good at understanding cultural relativity intellectually, and identify or define the concept easily on tests, they are not as capable at applying the concept to observations made of films or in field settings, situations which are disorienting for students despite the fact they have the conceptual tools to work through them. Further, the paper asks if trigger warnings and disorienting dilemmas are actually the same thing, wondering too if trigger warnings are consistent with the transformative potential of higher education promoted by Mezirow.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.295 · 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