Embodied Reflexivity Through the Arts: An Introduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emerging from a global health crisis that shone the light on the effects of alienation, isolation, and physical and spiritual vulnerability, we wondered what we might offer to re/center humanness and remind us of individual and collective possibilities to create positive change. With this call in our hearts and bodies, our special issue began to take shape. We are three scholars at different stages of our careers and with intersecting areas of expertise, but who are all grounded in reflexive ways of being, embodied ways of knowing, and artful ways of engaging. We acknowledge the scholars(hip) in each of these distinct areas and are grateful for the foundation on which we build. Thus, with our collective yearnings to centre an integrated way of at/tending to an emergent process of re/making and re/imagining knowledge, we offer this special issue with three intentions: to advance arts-based educational research in developing critical, social, and relational consciousness; to evoke/provoke embodied pedagogical practices that transform teaching/learning; and to contribute to re/humanizing education (Lyle, 2022) and social justice reform.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".