Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning with Adults: A Critical Pedagogical Introduction comes highly recommended.In prepublication endorsements, it is touted as offering "new insight into a dark moment in our human civilization" (Dr Carlos Alberto Torres); as providing an "incisive critique of adult education" (Dr Antonio Darder); and as pulling together "the richest publication to date linking and deepening our understanding of critical theory, adult education, and hope" (Dr Budd Hall).That's just the first three.There are many more.As Torres states in his preface, Leona English and Peer Mayo offer "a unique and critical perspective on the different policy challenges, theories, and practices prevalent in the field of adult learning and education" (p.xiii).They track various policy mistakes that have led to "a crisis of great epistemological and theoretical proportions in the field" (p.xiii) and to the apparent policy paralysis that accompanies it.But they do it with hope.Hope that "the long term goals of education for life and living can be accomplished alongside professional and vocational education" (p. 1).Hope that adult education can be about promoting social justice and "providing the space for critical examination of our ideas and our practices" (p. 1).As a practitioner of adult education with a keen interest in its political role, I approached the book with great expectations.The authors wrote the book primarily for the newcomer to the field of critical adult education.Neither a newcomer to the field nor a scholar of it, I looked forward to reading something that would bring me quickly up-to-date on contemporary critiques of adult education.But despite my lengthy experience in providing various forms of adult education and previous incursions into feminist and critical legal theories, I found the book tough going.Some of the difficulty lies in the academic style the authors adopted in writing their book and some is due to the prior knowledge that the reader must have to make sense of the analyses presented.The book gets off to an awkward and potentially off-putting start.Its first section is meant to contextualize adult education, yet it provides no introduction to the field or its current state.More confusing yet, the first chapter consists of a discussion of the debates around lifelong education/learning, not around adult education.In doing so, the authors seem to dismiss the use of the term adult education as an anomaly confined to the United States.But if, as the authors argue, lifelong learning is the most widespread term in use today, why is the term used only in the title
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".