Downstream River Dialogues: An Educational Journey Toward a Planetary-Scaled Ecological Imagination
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This article aims to subvert the nature/culture and subject/object divides that structure the dominant Western educational research paradigm by stepping beyond an exclusively human conversation and activating our ecological imaginations in the face of intensifying anthropogenic climate change. Design/Approach/Methods: Informed by animist ecofeminist philosophies, the river dialogues emerged from a climate action research field trip to the Athabasca oil sand mines in Alberta, Canada. They perform a “more-than-human” mode of narrative engagement with “nature in the active voice.” Findings: Despite the epistemological separations of Western-style education, I conclude that we can still find ways to dialogue and learn with the nonhuman world and thereby to stimulate our ecological imaginations. Originality/Value: This article showcases innovative more-than-human narrative methods and offers a collaborative alternative to the human-centric conventions of educational research and pedagogy.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 it