Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article draws upon Rancière’s concepts of the ‘distribution of the sensible’ and ‘dissensus’ in order to explore some of the tensions and processes at work in a multi‐year school change project that sought to transform a school through the ‘urban arts’. Building on student interest in extracurricular Hip‐Hop and street art programming, the school tried to integrate the urban arts across the curriculum through a partnership with local arts organisations and university researchers. While there were a number of project successes, the project also faced significant resistance, which in Rancière’s terms might be inevitable since the project tried to transform the dominant ways of doing and making in the school, displacing those who no longer saw themselves reflected. We understand the tensions in light of the disruptive power of street art and Hip‐Hop culture, but also as manifestations of antiblackness in education. Using data from a three‐year critical ethnography, we share a series of narrative vignettes which unpack the role of the visual arts in challenging the distribution of the sensible at the school, and offer insight into how teachers might have been better invited in as participants in dissensus.
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 | 0.018 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.093 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".