MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1799220422 · doi:10.1111/1467-9256.12103

Teaching the Post-September 11 Wars to the Post-September 11 Generation

2015· article· en· W1799220422 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methodologies in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInscribed figurePoliticsCurriculumConsciousnessSociologyMedia studiesHistoryPolitical sciencePedagogyLawEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How do you teach the politics of the post-September 11 wars to the post-September 11 generation? Students passing through undergraduate programs in political science in the middle of the current decade were young children on September 11, and they have never known a world without the politics of the post-September 11 wars roiling in the background. In that sense, the post-September 11 wars have been an ordinary, perhaps even unexceptional, part of their emerging political consciousness. Now, as these students reach the undergraduate level, they are presented with an IR curriculum that is deeply inscribed with the effects of events that, for them, do not have the resonance of lived experience. What IR teachers should be cognizant of is that the further away a generation gets from the core events, often the less general knowledge can be presumed. In this research paper, I explain techniques used to teach the post-September 11 Wars while reflecting on the pedagogical challenges and surprising outcomes of teaching a course on this topic.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.204
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it