An Analysis of a Conflict Between the Theories of Creationism and Science in the Experience of a Pre-service Physics Teacher
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores a conflict a pre-service physics teacher experienced while completing a teaching practicum at a religious high school that supported creationism. As a result of the conflict, the pre-service teacher was scapegoated by the staff and students at the school. An analysis of the projective dynamics involved in this conflict are explored including scapegoating, psychic inflation, fanaticism for science, and what was constellated in the pre-service teacher’s personal, familial, and cultural unconscious. In examining the pre-service teacher’s unconscious, it will be suggested that religion is part of the pre-service teacher’s repressed shadow and the cooperating/mentor teacher’s religious projections helped to constellate this shadow element. By examining the conflicts that arise between pre-service teachers and their cooperating teachers as a result of psychodynamics and differing worldviews, educators can begin to understand how analytical psychology may be applied so that such conflicts may be depotentiated in the future.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".