Creating Spaces of Engagement: Exploring High School Youth’s Voices in Reshaping the Social Justice Curriculum
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
The current structure of formal education makes it difficult for teachers and students to hold meaningful conversations to support high-school youth’s meaning-making of critical social-justice issues. This paper presents data on three high-school youth’s knowledge and experiences with social justice issues during the pandemic. Specifically, the paper aims to explore how youth construct knowledge and counter dominant discourses through utilizing informal learning spaces, such as social media platforms, peer and family conversations, as well as personal encounters. In addition, and more importantly, an exploration of how formal education can incorporate social-justice issues into the curriculum is considered. The analysis of these high school youth’s interview conversations presents their diverging needs to learn about social-justice topics in both formal and informal learning contexts. The data also illustrates the power of their voices in a way that could inform future curriculum development. Discussions and implications highlight the possibility of creating such ethical spaces in formal education to engage in social-justice topics.
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 | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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