MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210914235 · doi:10.1080/14681366.2021.1989709

Doing muscling pedagogies with children (and with diaphragms, cold season, physiological knowledges, and fans)

2021· article· en· W3210914235 on OpenAlex
Nicole Land

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePedagogy Culture and Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarly childhood educationPoliticsSociologyEarly childhoodPedagogyGender studiesPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article debates how muscles happen in early childhood education. Drawing on post-developmental pedagogies and feminist science studies, this article integrates moments from a pedagogical inquiry with movement in early childhood education to trace how muscles matter as complex and active ethical, political, and pedagogical concerns. After elaborating how muscles are understood in dominant Canadian pedagogical resources, I think with feminist science studies and post-developmental pedagogies to consider how muscles can be thought as an active undertaking. Then, the diaphragm muscle is mobilised to explore how physiological understandings of muscles might raise questions of muscle consequence, ongoingness, and access and activation, which extend into questions of perceptibility, process, and participation. I conclude by discussing how a focus on ‘muscling’ illuminates how pedagogical intentions can make muscles differently perceptible and emphasise the ethical and political complexities of doing muscling in everyday mo(ve)ments in early childhood.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.299 · 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