Critical Pedagogy in Practice in the Computing Classroom
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To enact social justice in the computer science classroom, we need to go beyond adding token ethics modules to Computer Science (CS) curricula and to rethink the power structures in our pedagogical practices. Critical pedagogy (CP) is a long-standing pedagogical tradition that aims to re-envision power structures in the classroom, but has been relatively underutilized in computing education. To go beyond theoretical ideas of what CP should be in CS, we interviewed 13 computing educators who identified as being influenced by critical pedagogy. We asked participants about their teaching practices, and how they apply CP ideals in their classrooms. To illustrate themes from our interviews and to give a rich description of what a CP-influenced classroom looks like, we present three vignettes highlighting a contrast of approaches to critical CS education: raising students' critical consciousness to see structures of oppression, helping students learn technology that supports their activism, and changing what it means to do computer science by integrating social and political forces. By providing tangible, concrete examples we hope to provide educators with inspiration for their own practice.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it