Voices of the global south: peace, development and education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We live in a complex and interconnected world. To understand that world, curricula have been developed that touch upon aspects of global education including; Peace Education, Human Rights Education, Development Education, Social Justice Education, and Education for Sustainable Development (Golstein & Selby, 2000). However, post-colonial theorists argue that notions of development, which underpin these educational initiatives, are often rooted in the industrialized West, and may not take into account any of its limitations or flaws. Increasingly, those involved in peace and development research are finding that when it comes to peace and development, we are missing a vital piece of the puzzle, the perspectives of individuals from the Global South. If peace and development curricula do not aim to include these voices, education initiatives may simply exacerbate the injustice they hope to end (Choules, 2007). Therefore, this will require “studying the issues from the standpoint of the South” (Cronkite, 2000, 162). The purpose of this study is to create space for the voices of teachers of the Global South, so that efforts in peace and development education would be a part of transforming systems of oppression into systems of empowerment and justice. The researcher traveled to northern Uganda to invite teachers there to share their perspectives on the role of education in fostering peace and development. As teachers shared their views, definitions of peace and development were expanded to include aspects of inequality, social justice, care and love. Participants shared the topics they believe must be included, in peace and development education, as well as the role that teachers and schools can take in fostering a more peaceful and socially just world.
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 | 0.001 | 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".