MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W237665514

Chapter 3: Remembering a Teacher, a Mentor, and a Friend

2009· article· en· W237665514 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lynn M. Burlbaw

Notice bibliographique

RevueCurriculum and Teaching Dialogue · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueReflective Practices in Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGeorge (robot)HistoryClassicsSociologyLawPsychologyArt historyPolitical science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

My earliest memories of are hearing his name as part of an introductory phrase as in, says.... or According to O.L.... as if he were some sort of Zeus-like figure off at the mother school, the University of Texas at Austin. In 1983, at UT Northwest, also known as Eastern New Mexico University (ENMU), four of O.L.'s advisees were on the faculty; George Mehaffy who was my master's committee chair, Mark Isham, also on my master's committee and still at Eastern, Charles Jackson, and, during the summers, Milam Rowald. O.L.'s name frequently arose in conversations, especially those related to Mark's finishing his dissertation. Little did I realize in 1982-83 that I, too, would begin my sentences with Davis says.... Ten years later I, too, would say, says.... I recall the circumstances of my first meeting with quite vividly. When Sherry Scarborough graduated in 1983, George Mehaffy tapped me to be the president of the Omicron Upsilon, the ENMU chapter of Kappa Delta Pi (KDP). In 1984, the KDP Convocation was being held in Montreal, Canada, in April. George said I to go as the chapter representative, not that the chapter could afford to pay my way, but the chapter had to be represented and, it would give me an opportunity to meet Professor Davis, Jr. and see, as I recall, if I would pass muster and be an acceptable potential doctoral student at UT studying under Doctoral studies not been/were not in our family 5-year plan--Bonnie and I recently married in 1983 and were planning on returning to Amarillo, where she owned a house, upon my graduation in 1984. But, at the urging of George and Mark, we flew to Montreal--one of the worst experiences of our married life, but a story for another time--to attend the KDP Convocation and meet the man. During a break in the business and legislative sessions, Convocation ran from Wednesday evening until Sunday back then, George came and said, Come, Lynn, it is time to go and meet O.L. Dutifully, I checked my shirt and coat for crumbs and flakes, straightened my tie and followed George--still Dr. Mehaffy at that time--down under the Queen Elizabeth Hotel to the lower city and a small glass-walled coffee shop where this man sat a table. I was in the presence of Davis, Jr.. I don't remember what happened next or what we talked about but after a short time George and I left sitting there talking to others who stopped in because they saw him sitting there in the shop. George told me after we left that I done well and that things were going to be okay. Several weeks later, after our return to Portales from Montreal, George called me into his office to let me know that obtained a fellowship for me and I was approved to start the doctoral program in August. As I previously stated, going on for a doctorate was not part of the new Burlbaw family plan and several weeks of discussion ensued before I/we decided we were going to Austin, but only long enough for me to get my degree, and then we would be back off to Amarillo or New Mexico or Arizona where we family. Little did we know! So, what was it about this guy that so impressed George Mehaffy and Mark Isham that I to go to first to Montreal to meet and then to Austin to study with him? As I recall George saying, not just once, but many times, has more in one day than most people have in a life-time. I have no doubt that part of the Montreal conversation consisted of running some ideas by me and me making some sort of, obviously appropriate, responses. The condition of having has, for me, been one of the defining characteristics of my relationship with and his willingness to share those and to encourage me to have and seek from other. Have you thought of ... or What would it be like if ... or How do you suppose ... appear in every conversation with O.L., even if the intended purpose of your conversation was to find out when you were going to get the draft of chapter III of your dissertation back! …

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,761
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,602

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,349
Écart entre enseignants0,329 · 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 tête enseignante, 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
GenreEmpirique

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

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCurriculum and Teaching DialogueMême sujetReflective Practices in EducationTravaux en français237 207