The Underside of Resistance in Education: Emancipation, Conservatism and Paradoxes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Democratisation is expressed by the access to education of students who have an exteriority relationship with regard to the academic norm, such as the program for Disabled Students with Special Needs for Adaptation or Inclusion (EHDAA) implemented in Quebec by technical and professional operators. Offering them aid does not mean that they will adopt behaviours and values which are considered to be compliant with institutional standards. Some refuse the proposed aid and look to define themselves in opposition to the institutional services they are offered, without, however, emancipating themselves or attaining freedom. Faced with these resistances, certain teaching environments have attempted to get them on board, to integrate them by transforming the educational form both on a theoretical and a practical level. The article advances the notion that the most emancipating innovations can turn out to be the most conservative, that critique can bite its own tail whereas all the teachers in Quebec state that they educate their students to be critical and to refuse any teaching likely to lead to conformist behaviour. The aim of the article is to raise this paradox and to provide the theoretical tools to be able to see the ins and outs.
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 | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.183 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".