Bibliographic record
Abstract
Practitioner self-study narratives play an important role in the engagement of Mystery, particularly in neoliberal educational contexts, which tend to prioritize rational goal-settings and answers as compared to Mystery’s a-rational ways of knowing (i.e., ways beyond rational knowledge) that dwell in our Being. As two educators, we share our curricular and pedagogical dwellings “on” and “in” Mystery. This inquiry stems from our desire to create generative curricular spaces for students to explore Mystery within their Being, with the Whole of existence, and with respect to their interconnectivity to global-local contexts and currents of struggle. The study’s three thematic findings are communicated via a multi-voiced text of narrative, poetic and academic writing. First, we lament the insufficient engagement of Mystery in education, while coming to know the strengths of such lament for transformative educational work. Second, we narrate our diverse dwellings “on” Mystery, which articulate our understandings and practices of Mystery. Third, we explore the value of an existential-ontology of education as a means to enhance engagement in Mystery with students, within the complexity of their whole selves and the Whole of life.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".