MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069727427 · doi:10.5430/jct.v3n1p86

Subject’s Recuperation in Education

2014· article· en· W2069727427 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pedro Ortega Ruíz, Eduardo Romero Sánchez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophy and Education Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationSubject (documents)Action (physics)Point (geometry)Face (sociological concept)Moral educationSociologyEpistemologyMoral obligationPedagogyLawPolitical scienceSocial sciencePhilosophyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors propose a pedagogy that considers a historical individual in all their reality, an education responsiveto the situation of each student in the uniqueness of their existence. The educational action is always an ethicalresponse to the demand of the other. Implies that I have acquired an obligation, a moral dependence which I cannotshed. Only when the educator becomes responsible for the other, responds to him in his situation, is concerned andtakes care of him is one in condition to educate. That is why education cannot be understood nor given without ethics,without a responsible relationship with the educate. That is why when we put forward another model of education,we are demanding other ethical and anthropological assumptions as a starting point, those assumptions that explainman man with human face.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicPhilosophy and Education PedagogyFrench-language works237,207