MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Iván Illich in Conversation with David Cayley

2011· article· en· W1967207346 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jon Igelmo Zaldívar

Bibliographic record

VenueEncounters in Theory and History of Education · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationSociologyPsychoanalysisPhilosophyArtPsychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A la bibliografa de ivn illich es necesario añadir una serie de trabajos que, por lo general, han pasado desapercibidos para quienes desde la pedagogía han realizado recientes acercamientos al pensamiento de este autor.Se trata tres series de programas emitidos en la radio canadiense CBC en 1988, 1989 y 2000, y dos libros publicados por la editorial Anansi en 1992 y 2005.Estos trabajos son el resultado de las entrevistas que el periodista canadiense David Cayley mantuvo con Illich en los años ochenta y noventa.Illich y Cayley coincidieron por primera vez en el Centro Intercultural de Documentación (CIDOC) de Cuernavaca, México, en 1969.Para entonces Cayley había vivido una experiencia agridulce como profesor voluntario de una escuela en la isla de Borneo, dentro del programa de ayuda al desarrollo de la Canadian University Service Overseas.De ahí que los textos que en ese tiempo estaba publicando Illich en relación a la crítica a las instituciones educativas modernas, y que formaron parte de su libro La sociedad desescolarizada (1971), llamaran la atención de Cayley.Después de aquel primer encuentro en México Cayley dio seguimiento a los trabajos que fue publicando Illich en los años posteriores.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncounters in Theory and History of Education→Same topicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish Identity→French-language works237,207→