Mobilizing citational practices as feminist curriculum-making in early childhood education
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
This article provides three propositions for thinking and doing citational practices as more than only technical, aggregating, or evidence to bolster a particular perspective in early childhood education. Collectively, we work to complexify our understanding of enacting citational practices in early childhood education and offer provocations for how we might build novel, accountable, pedagogical citational relations as we read and think together with early childhood educators. After offering speculative propositions for thinking citational practices otherwise, we turn to one example of a moment from practice and imagine how we might mobilize citational practices while thinking with this event. We argue for citational practices as a method of feminist curriculum-making; we offer an invitation to activate citational practices as a one engagement with feminist scholars and scholarship, and feminist methods of engaging in thoughtful, locally relevant dialogue that advances and answers for the consequences of the citational practices decisions we make.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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