Bibliographic record
Abstract
International education tests, such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), steer the debate about education, form the image of a school, and specify the goals and objectives of the curriculum. Thus praise, prizes and other positive reinforcements become common methods in school. Through Franz Kafka's Letter to his Father I examine encouragement and teacher praise, which are, when we look into it, held in the grip of behaviourism. I take issue with this dominant thinking and make an attempt to go beyond praise and encouragement as positive reinforcements of desired behaviours that are postulated in advance. I make an educational argument out of Heidegger's phenomenological term, Ereignis, and suggest that teachers ought to praise that which the student is suited for and not only when they have fulfilled the demands of the curriculum. I also make an educational argument out of two Derridaean terms, hospitality and forgiveness, and claim that teachers ought to give back -- through praise and encouragement -- the students' self-respect, whatever their faults. Instead of being manipulative and serving narcissistic needs, praise ought to serve an education for democracy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".