The Marginalized Role of Non-formal Education in the Development of Adult Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1998, James Draper challenged adult educators in the introduction to his chronology to build on his chronology and to ask questions of history that might help us to understand the influence that "learning has had in directing and enriching the development of individual men and women." This paper attempts to respond to that challenge and provide an explication of the development of adult education in context: the context being the historical and social developments of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries with special attention and examination of the developments in and marginalization of non-formal adult education. The social, religious, philosophical and historical context of non-formal adult education demonstrates the contextual framework embedded in adult education and reveals a movement of voluntary organizations that have carried on massive non-formal educational endeavours. Résumé En 1998, dans l'introduction de sa chronologic, James Draper a mis au défi les formateurs d'adultes d'ajouter à sa chronologie et de poser des questions d'histoire susceptibles de nous aider à comprendre le rôle que «l'apprentissage a joué dans l'orientation et l'enrichissement du développement des individus, hommes ou femmes. » Cet article tente de relever ce défi et offre une explication du développement de la formation permanente dans un contexte particulier. L'examen de ce contexte, constitué par les développements historiques et sociaux du 19 siècle et du début du 20 siècle, porte une attention toute particulière aux développements et à la marginalisation de la formation permanente non-institutionnelle. Le contexte social, religieux, philosophique et historique de la formation permanente non-institutionnelle met en relief le cadre contextuel intégré à la formation permanente et fait apparaître un mouvement composé d'organismes bénévoles qui ont poursuivi une énorme entreprise d'éducation informelle.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".