The Echo of Why: Addressing Challenging Teaching Experiences through Forum Theatre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On stage, a student asks a pre-service teacher an all too common question: Why do I have to learn this? So began The Echo of Why , a forum theatre production developed at a mid-sized Western Canadian university. The performance emerged out of a pilot project investigating the possibilities of using research-based theatre and forum theatre to generate a communal space for sharing, engaging with, critiquing, and addressing challenging teaching experiences encountered by pre-service teachers. The embodied space created through the theatrical experience encouraged the imagination of new possibilities for responding to these challenges. During script development, performers were afforded an opportunity to deeply reflect on what it means to be a teacher and their motivations for becoming pedagogues. This presentation shares video excerpts from the development and performance of The Echo of Why , impacts on both performers and audience members, and challenges encountered to highlight insights into the possibilities of integrating forum theatre into pre-service teacher education. The presentation concludes with suggestions for creating more generative forum theatre spaces for exploring the challenging issues at the heart of becoming a teacher.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".