Reifying, Disorienting and Restoring Gender Binaries in Dialogic Literature Discussions
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
Abstract Dialogic pedagogy aims to bring multiple voices and perspectives into conversation, to create a classroom environment inclusive of multiple student identities, and to challenge hegemonic approaches to knowledge. As such, it seems particularly well‐suited for interrogating gender binaries and enhancing gender equity. Through micro‐ethnographic discourse analysis of video‐recorded literacy lessons, this study examines how traditional gender categories were reified and/or disrupted in literacy discussions in four Israeli elementary school classrooms experimenting with dialogic pedagogy. We found students and teachers frequently relying upon gender stereotypes in the participant examples they offered and in their interpretations of the story, “Fly, Eagle, Fly,” in class discussions. Originally framed as a parable of transformation and growth, the story unexpectedly provided an avenue to explore topics such as gender, transgenderism, and transsexuality. Sporadic instances arose in the discussion in which students subverted traditional binary gender constructs. These fleeting moments of disorientation underscored dialogic pedagogy's capacity to challenge gender norms. However, students and teachers treated transgenderism as taboo, and the topic's explicit consideration generated anxiety, with the teachers and some of the students trying to silence non‐heteronormative voices. Ultimately, teachers reinforced interpretations that allowed the gender order to be restored and seemed relieved when they were able to move on from the gender trouble episode. The study highlights the potential of dialogic pedagogy to challenge the heterosexual matrix and promote gender equity. However, it also demonstrates the importance of paying greater attention to gender issues in the development of dialogic pedagogy.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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