Practicing Embodied Listening for Transformation: The Transformative Listening Protocol
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
In this article, we explore the process of creating spaces for the practice and inquiry of transformative listening through the development of the Transformative Listening Protocol (TLP). Our premise is that embodied listening opens doors to transformations via a process to improve listening and safe spaces where people may engage with each other in storytelling and story listening. The organization of our paper flows from research design to relevance for transformative learning theory. We begin with a description of the practice led research design for the project (Candy, 2006), we follow that with the historical development of the TLP including sections on both the theoretical and methodological background. After this section we describe the practice-ing of transformative listening with three applications of listening in practice we documented. In the final paragraphs we explore the limitations and conclusions of the research design and of TLP. We conclude the paper with the relevance of practicing transformative listening for the evolution of transformative learning theory.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 it