{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01669449081803005, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00333889816360601, 'mean_word_length': 5.967441860465116, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
EMOTIONAL LANGUAGE-PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED 50 YEARS ON

"Paulo Freire popularized the Portuguese term conscientização, in his work Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970). The term represents a growth mindset that is continually developing criticality through consciousness. Freire believed education would benefit from students questioning teachers to develop meaning-making and clarity of rationale. Paulo Freire coined the phrase, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, with his ground-breaking and inspirational view of the education system in 1970. His book noted students as oppressed by an education system by singling out the teacher-student relationship and offered insight into policy changes and approaches to teaching that considered student-centered education and the development of student discourse. Fifty years later, this paper presents a critical investigation of the impact of technology devices used in education among vulnerable and marginalized populations as a highly significant and needed focus, given the rapidly increasing reliance on internet-based technologies across the increasingly diverse communities comprising our public educational system. Current school technology agreements and poorly worded surveillance policies may silence vulnerable and marginalized populations voice or agency for students challenged by past trauma, lived experiences, emotion dysregulation or specifically a Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD). Teachers, administrators, technology staff and school board members were asked questions related to their understanding of policies related to technology and surveillance of devices such as laptops, cell phones, iPads and school sponsored BYOD programs. The information collected served as an indicator for which to measure the content knowledge and experience of the participants as well as the individual perceived goals or intentions of the participants school in relation to surveillance of staff and students. Data collected during the study indicated surveillance is attributed to five themes: well-being, assessment, policy, security, punitive. Key findings included: an assumption that school technology agreements included the use of personal devices and schools may not uniquely identify inappropriate behaviour. Additionally, assumptions informed the personal use of technology during school hours with administrators and IT staff referencing general larger district acceptable use policies assumed to be accepted as applicable to all technology equipment and general use. Assumptions regarding the enforcement of the technology agreement applications to personally owned cell phones at school, were enforced during tests; and considered generally accepted privacy concerns by students and staff related to the inappropriate recording of others through taking pictures; video; but extending to accessing social media. Finally, IT staff and administration shared parental concerns of the surveillance of students on Google and phones."