Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the findings of a three-month-long case study of Brockwood Park School (BPS), an alternative and holistic educational institution located in the UK. Using an emergent, flexible and participants-oriented methodology grounded in meditative inquiry, the study explores how a holistic and meditative curriculum shapes the living reality of BPS. A triangulated approach was employed in which observations, interviews, and focus group discussions were used in the collection of data. Results reached highlight four main findings: 1) self-understanding and intersubjective relations are at the core of BPS educational philosophy; 2) full-time faculty and many non-residential teachers join BPS because of an interest in the philosophical and educational ideas of Krishnamurti; 3) BPS provides a safe and inquiry-based learning environment to students and teachers; 4) BPS offers a promising humanistic and holistic educational approach. The paper then concludes with a discussion of the problems presently facing Brockwood. The contributions of this study are manifold: it emphasizes the educational importance of transformative education as exemplified in BPS; it provides a working model of how meditative inquiry can be used in conducting qualitative research; and demonstrates how holistic and meditative education support children’s growth and development.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".