MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996315321 · doi:10.18357/jcs00019908

Friendly Guns: Power, Play, and Choice in Preschool

2020· article· en· W2996315321 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Childhood Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Methods and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationBiopowerSociologyEthnographyPower (physics)SocialityEarly childhoodPsychologyGender studiesEpistemologyAestheticsSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyAnthropologyPoliticsArtEcologyLinguisticsPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the power relations that emerged during an eight-week study of an afterschool program in a Montessori preschool. Drawing from a theoretical assemblage that engages Foucault’s theory of biopower and Bennett’s conceptualization of thing power, I analyze the intra-actions between the human and more-than-human and consider how children’s bodies were disciplined to do and be certain things during a time of day when children could choose their play activities. A critical discourse analysis of ethnographic data details the ways in which certain intra-actionsnormalized some children’s ways of knowing, being, doing, and playing while marginalizing others. I conclude by attending to the potential of children’s relationships with popular culture in early childhood classrooms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it