Illuminating Two Secondary Schoolteachers’ Praxes on a ‘terrain of freedom:’ Lessons for Teacher Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attunes to the stated focus of this special issue—teacher subjectivities on a terrain of freedom—to consider the qualities, possibilities and limits of teachers’ praxes and development upon this ‘terrain.’ In response to the call, we explore three critical questions: 1) Where does the teacher’s freedom lie amidst required protocols and standardization?; 2) Can teachers transcend how they have been conceived and conditioned?; and 3) How can teachers engage in transformative development? Through a "poetics of teaching," inspired by Hansen (2004), we frame teaching as a curricular and pedagogical art form that melds interdisciplinary, intellectual, aesthetic, and moral dimensions to enrich the professional and personal livelihoods of teachers and, in turn, students. This approach supports UNESCO's (2021) principles of lifelong professional learning and the nurturing of the different global and local ecosystems that connect to our K-12 classrooms. Drawing on empirical research from a pilot study, this article highlights the transformative practices of two secondary school teachers as they navigate and expand upon their professional “terrain of freedom,” demonstrating different institutional possibilities and constraints. Our findings suggest that teacher education programs should cultivate environments that encourage innovation, critical reflection, and ethical engagement, aligning with UNESCO’s calls for a new social contract that advocates for teachers as agents of change in reimagining education for more just and sustainable futures. These lessons learned from our pilot study underscore the need, as we suggest, for teacher education to nurture, support, and sustain professional educators capable of transforming curriculum, their pedagogical, and classroom communities toward and on behalf of the public good.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".