MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412800382 · doi:10.1080/15505170.2025.2536171

Epistemic justice, continuum thinking, and discomfort pedagogy: Teacher candidates engage with doing equity work through the vantage point of sexual violence prevention

2025· article· en· W4412800382 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Salsabel Almanssori

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Pedagogy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEquity (law)SociologyEconomic JusticeWork (physics)PedagogyPsychologySexual violenceSocial psychologyCriminologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores how teacher candidates engage with sexual violence prevention as a site of equity learning within a year-long initial teacher education course in Ontario, Canada. Grounded in feminist pedagogy and structured around service learning, the course positioned sexual violence as a relational, emotional, and systemic issue requiring intentional, sustained engagement. Drawing on reflective journal entries that teacher candidates wrote throughout the year, the study employed feminist critical discourse analysis to examine how participants made sense of their learning. The analysis produced three discursive themes: enacting a pedagogy of discomfort, doing epistemic justice to sexual violence, and adopting continuum thinking. Findings reveal how teacher candidates moved beyond reductive understandings of consent and sexual violence to engage with the broader social and institutional conditions that scaffold harm. The study demonstrates the transformative potential of integrating experiential learning and trauma-informed frameworks to prepare educators to engage in meaningful, continuous equity work across educational contexts, while also exemplifying how the sexual violence curriculum extends to other equity issues in preparing students to enact practical strategies for social and institutional change.

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 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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and PedagogySame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207