Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elite boarding-schools. Ethnography of one kind of power transmission. Having gone to a private boarding-school, or prep-school as they are known, in the United States has always been an excellent path to a job as a decision-maker. Although these institutions account for less than 1 % of all highschool enrollment, they turn out a disproportionately high number of outstanding figures in the world of business, politics and culture. Traditional and conservative, prepschools are a typically American institution ; part puritanical, part English, part Wall Street, they have no equivalent anywhere. They played an important role in forming and maintaining a dominant class in America because they accepted both East-Coast patricians and parvenus. The collective identity forged in these prep-schools thus lays the foundations of an aristocratic solidarity and consciousness. Between 1978 and 1983, the authors visited 55 such boarding schools throughout the US. They spent five days in each, attending classes, assemblies, chapel, games, cultural events, meetings of the disciplinary committee, and student and faculty parties and receptions. Hundreds of teachers — and students — were interviewed as well as principals (men and women), admissions program directors, university counselors, student-body representatives, dormitory prefects, psychologists and doctors.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".