MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410839084 · doi:10.63997/jct.v37i2.971

Pedagogies of Attending and Mourning

2022· article· en· W4410839084 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum Theorizing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationSociologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a 1992 chapter, “Cries and Whispers,” William Pinar called for conversations around death to become normative in education, but that call has largely been ignored in curriculum theory. Drawing on Rosi Braidotti’s critical posthumanism, this article engages death as a site of curriculum inquiry. The author begins by discussing the fragility of human life and the necessity of death to the ecological world and highlighting the interconnections between Western death-denying culture and the Anthropocene. The author then discusses the material facts of death (the corpse) in conversation with posthumanism, ultimately suggesting an emergent environmental ethic—attending to waste. The notion of attending is then presented and elaborated as a form of pedagogy through its close relationship to the concept of mourning. The author concludes by suggesting attending as an affirmative sort of pedagogy that denies the binaries of negativity and positivity through a discussion of Rosi Braidotti’s affirmative ethics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it