Metodologia otra: Challenging modern/colonial matrix with Paulo Freire and decolonial thinking
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
An increasing number of academic scholars have been espousing a decolonial stance, seeking to address the so-called coloniality of power/knowledge. Yet, this path is far from cleared in critical management research and education, where we find a substantial number of studies bringing post-colonial arguments to the debate, but very few engaging with decolonial thinking. In this essay, we highlight the contribution of Paulo Freire to the decolonial debate through the concept of metodologia otra, a notion that questions the hegemony of Western-based methodologies and challenges the modern/colonial matrix by carving out spaces for those who have suffered a long history of oppression and marginalization to communicate from their own frames of reference. We argue that more than being critical, reflexive, or dialogical, a concrete engagement with decoloniality means mobilizing radical principles such as learning to unlearn, escrevivência, interculturality, and corazonar/sentipensar. Although Freire’s contribution to the construction of metodologia otra was original and pivotal, this contribution is poorly known. By salvaging Freire’s contribution in this special issue, we move decolonial concepts and values from the margins to the center of postcolonial debates within critical management studies and critical management education communities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it