Change agent teaching for interreligious collaboration in Black Lives Matter times
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Interreligious discourse opens ways to discover how shared justice values and ethical actions can inform our responses amid the unjust disparities that privilege some and marginalize many. At present, we live in a public landscape of societal dissonance that heightens the urgency for people with theological grounding to bridge collaborative public witness among varied religious traditions. I describe “Black Lives Matter times” as a present expansive era in which the stew of public tension, stirred by decades of structural disparities, link religion and politics to an agenda to dismantle equitable public policies after the Civil Rights era. My goal for writing Change Agent Church in Black Lives Matter Times: Urgency for Action (2020) is to encourage practitioners and educators to prepare for public justice ministry that I call public witness . The book offers analytical discussion points for critical reflection and a toolkit of process methods to mobilize for public justice roles and strategic actions as collaborative change agents. In this article, as in the book, public witness is described as “faith‐informed commitment to take action in solidarity with the marginalized, and to help mobilize change” (2). As the title conveys, the term change agent signifies “the ways in which clergy and interfaith leaders could exemplify a public justice ethic as motivational catalyst” (6). To prepare for “change agent teaching” shifts from teacher‐centered lectures to a learner‐centered focus to build core competencies for interactive relational engagement. Change agent teaching of religion and theology can connect faith and praxis, as theopraxis, to frame justice components of public witness. As well, interactive learning helps to develop competencies under two rubrics: contextualization and conscientization. (a) Contextualization connects experiential narratives to respect lived experiences at the intersections of our individual and collective identity. (b) Conscientization raises awareness with inclusive scrutiny of issues to articulate how theological and ethical values or theoethics influence our actions. This article focuses on pedagogical approaches and process methods to teach and learn about the change agent role of public witness to support an ethos of restorative justice as understood across faith traditions.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".