How might IB classroom pedagogy ‘make a better world?’ (Toward) illuminating a promising IBDP teacher praxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Moving beyond both a neoliberal as well as a ‘heroic’ conception of how the International Baccalaureate (IB) might ‘make a better world’, this paper focuses on the transformative potentiality of IBDP classroom pedagogy from the perspective of an experienced and critically minded educator, whose praxis has evolved across more than three decades of teaching IBDP courses in elite, well-established international schools around the world. In the IBDP teacher’s account, particular attention is placed on the relational qualities of the (ideal) classroom culture and on the tensions between learner autonomy, teacher and learner authenticity and the critical imperative to interrogate privilege. We seek to provide a generative case for researchers and educators to reflect and find greater precision on the desired ends, possibilities and limits of critical and progressive pedagogies in school classrooms under contemporary conditions constituting our ‘world in trouble’. More specifically for stakeholders of the IBDP, we offer up a promising orientation to IBDP classroom pedagogy in pursuit of the IB mission.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".