Phenomenology of Professional Practices in Education and Health Care: An Empirical Investigation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article a group of professionals working in education and health care exploreprofessional practices and interactions from a phenomenological perspective, drawing on Maxvan Manen’s conceptualization of the phenomenology of practice and his knowledge interestin understanding and furthering sensitive, caring professional practice. Posing the questionwhat is the meaning of interaction in encounters within education and health care, we lookat practice experiences drawn from close observations and interviews during researchconcerning special needs education, physiotherapy and weight loss programs. Three anecdotesare offered as a way to ‘show,’ rather than interpret, the processes involved. Each anecdote isfollowed by reflections in which we draw on van Manen’s notion of pathic knowledge andNancy’s ideas about co-existence to develop phenomenological insights about temporal,embodied and relational qualities of the phenomenon of interaction in professional practice.Such interaction seems to involve continuous negotiation. It emerges as a process of exchange,a movement back and forth between supporting and letting oneself be supported; betweenconfronting and being confronted; between pushing and being pushed. Moments of active engagement give way to periods of waiting for the other to act. The experience is one ofcontinuous back and forth movement in the relational space in-between.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it