MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969153830 · doi:10.5840/teachphil20022515

Teaching Applied Ethics, Critical Theory, and “Having to Brush One’s Teeth”

2002· article· en· W1969153830 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Applebaum

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching Philosophy · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrushSociologyPhilosophyEpistemologyEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, l'auteur enumere les objectifs de son cours d'ethique appliquee. Il s'agit d'abord de developper le sens critique des eleves afin de favoriser les echanges et de valoriser l'argumentation. Les dialogues doivent ensuite s'accompagner d'une reflexion plus profonde sur le sens de ces discussions ethiques en rapport avec leur propre vie. A terme, les aspects positifs de ce cours peuvent s'elargir a l'ensemble de la classe en premier lieu, dans le cadre des relations interpersonnelles qui seraient alors accompagnees des notions de respect et de confiance. L'exemple donne ici reprend les themes du harcelement sexuel et de la discrimination positive.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching PhilosophySame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207