Entertaining tensions: teaching with and learning from popular culture in professional education
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
This article discusses findings from an ongoing qualitative studies about the incorporation of popular culture in university-based professional education. The focus is on how popular culture can become a curricular resource to support learning about theory or concepts and contentious or sensitive issues, at a time when neoliberal trends of consumerist ideology and technical vocationalism influence professional education and universities generally. Students who enter programmes expecting an emphasis on work-related information risk missing content and experiences designed to foster their development as well-informed, curious, and ethical professionals. Three tensions that emerged in the analysis are highlighted: un/applied, in/attentive, and a/critical. After grounding the study theoretically and reviewing literature on university-based professional education and public pedagogy, those tensions are outlined using segments of data to suggest the potential and limitations of a pedagogical approach that can make education both critical and enjoyable.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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