Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult educators talk emphatically of empowerment as a process through which adult learners find their voices and develop the self-confidence to take control of their lives. Empowering adults has come to signify what is distinctive and admirable about the field. Michel Foucault, the French social theorist, developed an analysis of productive power coexisting to different degrees as repression and liberation. Foucault maintains that, in modern society, sovereign power (exercised from above by a clearly discernible authority) has been replaced by disciplinary power (exercised by people on themselves and others in their lives). An appreciation of Foucault's ideas can help adult educators avoid a naive understanding of how power manifests itself in their daily practices—particularly the false face of apparently beneficient power exercised to help adult learners realize their full potential. Résumé Les éducateurs d'adultes mettent de l'avant l'empowerment en tant que processus permettant aux apprenants de trouver leurs voix et de développer leur confiance en soi en vue de prendre le contrôle de leurs vies. L'empowerment des adultes en est arrivé à référer à ce qui est distinctif et admirable dans le domaine. Michel Foucault a élaboré une analyse du pouvoir de production qui co-existe à differents degrés comme force de répression et de libération. Foucault soutient que dans la société moderne le pouvoir souverain (celui exerce d'en haul par une autorité identifiable) a été remplacé par un pouvoir disciplinaire (exercé par les gens sur eux-mêmes, sur leur vie et sur celles d'autres personnes dans leur entourage). Un examen des vues de Foucault pourrait aider les éducateurs d'adultes à dépasser une compréhension naive de la manière dont le pouvoir se manifeste dans leurs activités courantes, particulièrement l'image erronée du pouvoir apparemment bénéfique exercé dans le but d'aider les apprenants adultes à réaliser leur plein potentiel.
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.096 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".