MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1970247406 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2009.0048

Our Victorian Education (review)

2009· article· en· W1970247406 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vicki Macknight

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian review · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueThemes in Literature Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMeritocracyCreativityIntellectSociologyIdeal (ethics)PedagogySocial scienceLawPolitical scienceTheologyPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Our Victorian Education Vicki Macknight (bio) Our Victorian Education by Dinah Birch; pp. 192. Oxford: Blackwell, 2008. $81.99 cloth, $37.99 paper. It is hard to disagree with Dinah Birch's central thesis that Victorian debates about education can help us think again about the structures and governance of contemporary British education. It was the Victorians, Birch argues, "who first conceived of education as a formal process that would be crucial [End Page 165] to the life of the nation and all its citizens, with prescribed courses of study, and outcomes measurable by examination" (2). In writing about education, Birch is interested less in the details of policy or pedagogy and more in the overarching ideal of what education could do for individuals and society. For the Victorians, Birch writes, education was to transform individuals into beings of intellect and imagination, and British society into a modern meritocracy. During the era, elementary school was made free and compulsory for all children, and the numbers of secondary schools expanded dramatically. Universities, colleges, and night schools extended the age one could continue in education. These were signs, according to Birch, of a social revolution led by education and accompanied by broad debates over just what education should do. What place should moral or religious teaching have? How should women be involved? How might the education system balance the needs of the nation's children with those of each individual? How should factual learning be balanced with the human urge for creativity and imagination? Instead of focusing on any one age group or type of education, Birch looks at these debates through a literary lens. Birch is a scholar of Victorian literature, able to navigate through the work of a long list of Victorian poets and writers. From all, she finds support for her contention that British education needs to be structured but flexible, and all children included in its humanizing efforts. "The need for national structures remains apparent," she says, "but it is also increasingly clear that its processes must co-exist with a flexibility that can make room for the individual pupil" (145). Birch freely acknowledges that in advocating these things she is not making a novel claim. And just as well. Who would disagree that we should educate children in a personal and individualistic way rather than in huge inflexible systems? That we should foster independent thought, encouraging children to grapple with the darker sides of human life, rather than educating them for thoughtless work? And who would suggest that pride in personal achievement and awareness of what one does not understand would be better than the pressures of competitive examinations in which for some to score highly others must score poorly? The difficulty is how to achieve these things. In all, Birch is animated by an admiration of the poets and writers she studies. This is well placed, of course, and she does not shy away from dealing with issues on which their thought radically differs from our own. She also writes clearly of the intersections between gender, class, and religion and their varying and sometimes contradictory impacts on debates around education. These points are explored through the first three chapters, particularly chapter 2, "Religious Learning." Here she explores the views espoused by Victorian writers on the value of religion in schools, the problematic dominance of religious values in politics and social life, and the moral questions that emerge when religious authority diminishes. Perhaps the most engaging part of this book, for me anyway, was the chapter [End Page 166] focusing on women. Here we find ample evidence for the contradictory impulses that governed the thoughts of female writers (some of whom also worked as teachers) as women gained a larger role and stake in public education. Over the century, as education for males and females became established in larger institutions, women faced questions that lie at the heart of gender difference. Should female students attend schools set up in the masculine mode? they asked. For many the answer, perhaps surprisingly, was no. There is something special, many argued, about the emotional and imaginative capacities that are fostered in the more private spheres of domestic and...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,061
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,204

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0050,009
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,002
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0610,017

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,292
Écart entre enseignants0,273 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian reviewMême sujetThemes in Literature AnalysisTravaux en français237 207