Teaching about political violence in Canada: the everyday diplomatic challenges and strategies of secondary teachers
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
Utilising data from 10 semi-structured interviews (n = 5), this article explores the diplomatic challenges and concerns Canadian secondary teachers faced when teaching about political violence and the strategies they employed while navigating these. Drawing insight from the notion of ‘everyday diplomacy’, the article frames teaching as a kind of diplomatic practice, where teachers employ a variety of strategies, ranging from avoidance to forthright resistance, in response to interested actors’ challenges and concerns. The findings also suggest the nature of these strategies depend on the teachers’ teaching contexts and relations to interested actors, the perceived and/or real power of these interested actors’ pressures, and the teachers’ own professional maturity, and thus confidence in advocating for this type of professional work. My contribution is to offer insight into teachers’ diplomatic knowledge, skills, and practices, and in doing so, highlight their importance as part of teachers’ day to day professional work.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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