Responding to racial incivility in classrooms: Hospitality and responsibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the relationship between education and hospitality in the specific context of moments of incivility in classrooms, with special attention to racial/white resentment. The authors reflect on the extent to which nurturing intellectual candor with interpretive charity (Callan, 2011) can be extended to incivility shaped by white resentment. They contend there is a need to approach hospitality as responsibility (Levinas, 1969, thereby suggesting conditions for student agency. The relationship between the educator as host and giver of hospitality and the students as guests and respondents is discussed (Ruitenberg, 2011b). The paper argues the role of the teacher is key to ensuring those at the receiving end of the perceived attack are able to reclaim hospitality by being given the space and the means to respond to the offense with agency. This paper discusses the need for parameters balancing free speech and teaching moments with restoring agency to the marginalized others. Finally, the study proposes responding to racial resentment requires framing teaching moments within an ethic of responsibility which aims to restore agency for those on the receiving end of racial incivility.
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 | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".