Agir par mimétisme: la Commission européenne et sa politique d'éducation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé. Les acteurs individuels comme collectifs s'inspirent des expériences passées au moment de la conception de leurs politiques. Or, nous retrouvons au niveau de la politique européenne d'éducation et du discours que la Commission de Bruxelles élabore afin de justifier ses actions dans ce domaine trois dynamiques qui ont jadis joué un rôle important, dans le cadre étatique, lors du processus de construction nationale, à savoir : la (re)structuration de l'univers spatial des individus appelés à composer la future “ communauté imaginée ”; l'édification d'un cadre culturel commun ou système de significations partagées; enfin, le processus d' “ atemporalisation-naturalisation ” de la communauté en formation.Cette observation suggère que, contrairement à une idée communément admise, si la Commission européenne intervient dans l'éducation depuis le début des années 60, ce n'est pas simplement pour des raisons économiques, c'est-à-dire pour assurer la réalisation pleine et entière du marché unique, mais aussi afin de développer un sentiment d'appartenance à l'Union chez les ressortissants des États membres, autrement dit une identité euro-communautaire jugée nécessaire à la réalisation “ d'une union sans cesse plus étroite entre les peuples d'Europe ”. Abstract. Decision-makers do not act in a policy vacuum. As they develop their programmes, they are aware of and influenced by available historical examples. If we look closely at the European Commission's education policy (measures as well as discourses), we notice the existence of similarities in the strategies that it deploys in this field and dynamics deployed much earlier by states engaged in nation-building (i.e. the redefinition of peoples' spatial representation of their community of belonging; the creation of a framework of shared values; and the process of ‘detemporalisation-naturalisation’). This observation leads us to believe that if the European Commission decided to get involved in the field of education at an early stage in the integration process, it was not only—as most people believe—to insure an effective implementation of the Common market in 1957 or of the Single Market in 1987. Rather, through its education policy, the Commission also hopes to create and foster a EU identity that the founding fathers and subsequent ‘Europeans’ considered necessary for achieving their goals of creating “ an ever closer union ”.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".