Learning and Leading Through Love: A Critical Personal History Self-Study of an Educator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This bricolage of critical personal history self-study considers how one school administrator has come to understand his roles, responsibilities, and the formation of identity within the context of a school system while envisioning the divergent possibilities of a yet-to-be-known future through the lens of love. During the self-study process, affective experiences were reflexively interrogated to draw out and unpack themes regarding one lived teaching life. Personal positionings, over time, have emerged as a crucial part of the self-study process of studying “one’s self, one’s actions, one’s ideas, as well as the ‘not self’” (Hamilton & Pinnegar, 1998, p. 238) as a means to address and explicate previously misunderstood privileges. The criticality of the study can be found in the ways in which the relationships between power, authority, knowledge production, and contextual social relations, are illuminated and mediated. School as place situates many considerations of the study, whereby Alcoff (1991) suggests, place may be a “social location, or a social identity” (p. 7)—the place of unfolding and enfolding of memories, encounters, and history within the confluence of past, present, and a possible future. The primary research question that has been considered throughout this study is, “How can I use self-study to better understand Albertan education in this current moment, and how and in what ways can my current pedagogical understandings allow for divergent future educational possibilities?” Throughout the process of the study, evidence in the form of non-linear (re)collections of stories bring to light the evolution of metaphorical understandings of past experiences of schools and schooling, and teachers and teaching. Considering these moments reflexively through personal history self-study has allowed for the critical illumination of some ways in which the current iteration of Albertan, positivist, assurance-focused education could afford for future iterative possibilities. The shifts in leadership responsibilities as outlined by Bedard and Mombourquette (2015) have served as implicit groundings of the current context of education in Alberta. Through the consideration of pedagogical metaphors (Gereluk et al., 2016) and associated entailments (Davis & Renert, 2013a, 2013b) within the evidence of the self-study, schema and paradigms, and the affordances allowed were considered. Ultimately, my self-study has emerged as a story of impact and possibility—perceptions of the subtle perturbative impacts on primary and secondary teaching practices, pedagogies, and paradigms, and the possibilities for the evolution of teaching pedagogies from reductionist and positivist towards enmeshed, relational, ecological-sensibilities and pedagogical possibilities of love.
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 | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".