Notice bibliographique
Résumé
While the spinning wheel, known in many Indian languages as the charkha, continues to be an integral part of modern India's imagination (Gandhi made it a symbol of self-reliance and freedom), very few people have actually seen the object, leave alone having worked with it. There is also a huge discussion on the (ir)relevance of this technology in modern times because it is hand driven, slow, and low on output and productivity. Is the charkha then an obsolete and irrelevant technology? Is it a slow and unproductive relic of the past that we remember only because of Gandhi or his central role in India's freedom struggle? Can it play any role at all in the many crises we are facing today? The Spinning Experience follows thirty students at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay as they learn the slow and gentle art of hand spinning on the charkha in a three-day workshop which is part of a course I teach titled Technology, Society and Development. One sees a churn of the narrative as the workshop progresses—through a combination of discussion and debate but more importantly experiential learning and the possibility of creating tacit knowledge and understanding. Learning unfolds in unexpected ways. The yarn breaks regularly but then the rhythm begins to set in and new understandings are created for ideas of skill, labour, history, craft, and sustainability. The highlight of course is a small length of cotton yarn (one hundred to two hundred meters on average) students take with them as a real, tangible output of what they have created themselves. The idea of the film originated from my experience of conducting this three-day workshop for the preceding five semesters. The transformation one saw in the short span of the three days—students join the workshop for ninety minutes on three consecutive days each—was both quite remarkable and fascinating. There was on the one hand a demonstration of how learning happens by doing and then there is the output itself. By output I mean both the physical yarn that is created and also the experiences the students go through. Some of this was reflected in short assignments students subsequently wrote on the experience of doing the workshop. I felt this experience could/should be captured in real time and not only through a post-facto reflection. Filming the workshop as it unfolded offered that opportunity, and it helps that I am trained as a filmmaker. The approach was ethnographic and instinctive—I had a sense this could be a film, but that was not the plan and neither was I sure how it would turn out finally. I thought of a film only when I saw the call from KULA, and I would say in retrospect that my instinct about the possibility of a film did turn out to be right. It helped hugely of course that I found a willing and deeply empathetic collaborator in Pradeep Patil when he agreed to edit and actually put the film together. The few public screenings I have had of the film (all incidentally in educational institutions) have drawn an unexpectedly warm and positive response and given me much confidence and hope. We are also entering the film into documentary film festivals and while we do not know what the outcomes will be, we are hopeful it will be well received in this community as well.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».