A comparison between the theoretical underpinnings of responsibility in TPSR model, VO model and SJ approaches: a socioecological perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Responsibility involves a commitment to making informed decisions and acting appropriately. This paper examines the theoretical underpinnings of responsibility by comparing key principles in the Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility model, the Value Orientation model and the Social Justice approaches. We discuss the distinctions, overlaps, and their pedagogical implications for health and physical education curricula through a socioecological perspective. The Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility model emphasises both personal growth (effort, self-direction) and social well-being (respect, caring for others) towards transfer. The Value Orientation model integrates these values with a focus on social change, fostering autonomy and solidarity. The Social Justice approaches highlights issues such as racial, ability, and gender discrimination. Our contribution seeks to clarify theoretical foundations between these models and approaches, and their links with the transformative potential of a Socially-Just TPSR approach in educating students to become active responsible citizens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".