A Critical Approach to Teaching About, Through, and For Human Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the findings from a collaborative inquiry research study that explored instructors’ perspectives and students’ perceptions of an innovative ten-day graduate level human rights education course for educators. The course was the result of a partnership between the Faculty of Education at the University of Manitoba and the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. The purpose of the course was to encourage students to critically examine human rights; specifically, whose human rights stories get told, how they get told, and by whom. The findings suggest that while there were worthwhile insights gained when considering on teaching about, through, and for human rights, there were also significant challenges that can inform other courses that encourage students to adopt a critical stance with topics, like human rights, that seem unassailable. Cet article présente les résultats d’une recherche menée en collaboration dont l’objectif était d’explorer les perspectives des instructeurs et les perceptions des étudiants concernant un cours de cycle supérieur de dix jours pour éducateurs sur les droits de la personne. Le cours était le résultat d’un partenariat entre la Faculté d’éducation de l’Université du Manitoba et le Musée canadien pour les droits de la personne. L’objectif du cours était d’encourager les étudiants à examiner les droits de la personne de façon critique, en particulier les récits concernant les droits de la personne qui sont racontés, la manière dont ils sont racontés et par qui. Les résultats suggèrent que, bien que le cours ait permis d’acquérir des connaissances utiles qui peuvent être enseignées sur les droits de la personne et pour ces droits, il a également permis de mettre à jour des défis importants qui pourraient s’appliquer à d’autres cours dans lesquels on encourage les étudiants à adopter un point de vue critique sur des sujets tels que les droits de la personne qui semblent inattaquables.
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 | 0.029 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".