Self-managed and cooperative processes: Knowledge construction, interactional spaces, expanding territories
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper I will address issues regarding self-management (auto-gestión) and cooperative processes as they relate to educational experiences currently taking place in Argentina. A first note of caution is that in Spanish, the meaning of auto-gestión cannot easily translate into English as self-management. I will use this category, though, as a placeholder and for lack of a better word, but we should keep in mind that here self-management refers to a kind of organizational structure AND an ideological perspective based on a specific type of authority (collective), which entails specific decision making processes based on internal democracy, on solidarity and cooperative orientations and on a strong critique over capitalism as an economic and ideological system. Therefore, when I use the term self-management I am concurrently referring to processes of self-organization (self-government) and self-management, which are both and at the same time, political and educational. This perspective has a long tradition in Latin America, and it is usually referred to as educación popular. In other parts of the world, e.g., in the United Sates and Canada, it is also referred to as critical education, liberatory education, critical pedagogy or emancipatory education. These perspectives build on work conducted by Latin American, North American, African, Australian and European scholars framed in post-modern, post-colonial and de-colonial perspectives (e.g., De Souza Santos; Mignolo; Giroux; McLaren; etc.).For the past seven years, I have been documenting the work of several different types of self-managed organizations, e.g., cooperatives of workers, volunteer groups, non-governmental organizations, self-managed groups within public, state-funded organizations. I have identified and analyzed these organizations? learning processes on two different yet related areas: that of their organization and sef-government; and that of their specific area (e.g., education; homeless housing projects; performance and arts; music; food production; printing; etc.).In this presentation I will focus on organizations whose direct area is conceived of as educational or school-related, and I will base my analysis on my own primary data and data reported by other researchers.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it