Feminist Dialogic Pedagogical Spaces in Teacher Education: Practical Inclusivity, Eye-opening and Change
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
In this reflective article, I explore a feminist dialogic pedagogy of inclusive education (IE) in the sociocultural context of my and my students’ lived experience. I ask what a feminist dialogic pedagogy means to my students. The purpose of this article therefore is to advance knowledge about a feminist dialogic pedagogy in teacher education with a focus on the formation of students’ critical consciousness of IE philosophy that is currently mandated by all Canadian provinces. My intention is to contribute to an evolving scholarship of feminist pedagogy in teacher education programmes with a grounded and creative understanding of teacher candidates’ lived experience. The article argues that feminist dialogic pedagogy creates a space of inclusion for all students. Despite and across social differences, this pedagogy leads a conscious change among students, impacting their daily lives. Consequently, students successfully achieve their academic goals because they feel critically attentive to and conscious of their situated knowledge ( Haraway, 1988 , Feminist Studies, vol. 14, pp. 575–599) in educational institutions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it