Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pragmatism has long held great sway in educational thought.However, there is still a lack of pragmatist orientation when it comes to how students interact with teachers.For example, while Dewey and his followers advocate the pragmatist move of making educational ends into means for further educational ends, there is little said about how students might treat their teachers.Should a person change ends into means when it comes to other people?Might pragmatism suggest that students use teachers as means to further ends?Would a Deweyean orientation toward human relations go so far as to break from Kant's moral dictum that every rational creature must be treated as an end in him or herself?This move of making human beings into means to further ends we might call pragmatic intersubjectivity.In this paper I will argue for this sort pragmatic intersubjectivity on the part of the student.While I do not claim to know if Dewey would have embraced pragmatism all the way to the use of other human beings, I do claim that the practice of using human beings should be advocated in educational contexts.I will argue that education remains impoverished if we continue to follow Kant's dictum.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".