"Sandpaper. Yeah.”: Educators’ embodied insights into comprehensive sexual health education pedagogy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this arts-informed inquiry, I examine Canadian sex educators’ embodied sense-making of comprehensive sexual health education (CSHE). I seek to understand how educators use their bodies to negotiate contested pedagogical terrain in order to gain insights into conflicting patterns observed in the literature, as well as to challenge how educators’ personal pedagogies may be implicated in uneven enactments of CSHE. Using sensory ethnographic principles, I focus inquiry on educators’ embodied experiences of contentious pedagogical practices, including the over-reliance on institutionalized forms of knowledge. I conceptualize their experiences as “interchange”— the sense of simultaneous bodily gaining and giving in response to the social-political demands of teaching CSHE. I analyze two focal experiences of interchange—namely, Feeling Right(s) and Be/ing Schooled—to highlight paradoxical frictions of educators’ personal and pedagogical anti-oppressive aims. Last, I utilize Maclaren’s concept of “unfreedom” to discuss addressing problematic CSHE practices as an intersubjective project.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".