Mountains Aren’t Blue: Re-conceptualizing Schooling to Welcome Diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students come to school with different aims, different interests, different skills, and different ways of looking at things. Yet, as educators, we sometimes act as if we believe that individual differences are problems that reside within particular children, to be fixed with remediation. Throughout history, students’ differences - their failure to fit the system - have been used as a rationale for imposing schooling practices that are bureaucratic rather than educational in intent. A production model of education, designed by experts, requiring compliance with standards, and producing conforming end-products, continues to have a tenacious hold on how we think and what we do. A view of individuals as units of production within an organization stands in contrast with a view of individuals as social collaborators and initiators of action. This production model of schooling yields a depersonalized, exclusive environment where individual talents are stifled and students fear to take risks. In this article, I offer some thoughts about where this production model came from, what its implications are, and why we continue to operate in accordance with it, even while giving lip-service to constructivist and inclusive philosophies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".