Foucault Account on Power/Knowledge: Its Implication on Educational Process in Nigeria.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The power/knowledge relationship is studied rarely as social factors integrated in research framework. We question the factors that influence knowledge creation underlining the role of power in the development of the child in the classroom, advancement in technological, innovation, and economic stability in the twilight of the 20th century entering the 21st century. The views of Foucault on power and knowledge provides a basis to rethink the whole power and knowledge construct. Using a descriptive approach of the Foucault Power/Knowledge relation in the Nigeria emerging education scenario and Foucault’s lens necessitates the understanding of power not as a social construct between sovereign and individuals but in the politics of everyday life. We offer four analytic strategies: beginning from power and discipline, power and repression, power and knowledge and the use of modern power in technology. The power/knowledge discussion to grow society in general and the Nigerian society. Findings indicates that Power/Knowledge transfer is facilitated through creation of a safe school and work environment that demonstrates positive learning. We recommend using power/knowledge as a tool to relevant pedagogy practice for the learning processes of technology of the self and to provide new knowledge in the learning environments is crucial for understanding of the socially constructed nature of truth and its inscription in knowledge/power relations. Keywords – Education, Pedagogy, Power, Knowledge, Technology of the self, Discipline
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".