Sex Scenes: Exploring the Use of Theatre of the Oppressed to Expand on Adult Sex Education Discourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comprehensive sex education does not exist in Ontario at any age demographic. This project proposes arts-based pedagogies as part of the strategy to correct this knowledge deficit. Documenting the theory and practice related to the development of a theatrical script aimed at expanding sexual education discourse and learning into adulthood, this research-creation project works to uncover how work can be done to destigmatize sex and develop a productive and all-encompassing societal discourse on the topic. By incorporating Theatre of the Oppressed, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and ParticipatoryAction Research, the research methodology focused on inclusion in data gathering and knowledge mobilization. This methodology included surveys (n=19) to build an understanding of sex education experiences in Ontario, working with a team of student devisors to incorporate these stories into a well-rounded and inclusive script, as well as a summary and reflection upon this process. In future iterations of this project, the work could be expanded by using similar methodologies to focus on specific communities, engaging with any equity-deserving group to build educational discourse and awareness.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".