MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108550866 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v19i2.2588

Spirituality of Adult Education and Training. Leona M. English, Tara J. Fenwick and Jim Parsons (2003). Krieger Publishing, Malabar FL, 196 pages.

2005· article· en· W2108550866 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John M. Dirkx

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingSpiritualitySociologyArtMedia studiesLiteratureMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent debates regarding educational policy and practice have again made prominent questions regarding the purpose and value of adult education and training.For the most part, these debates stress technical issues at the expense of political, social, and moral concerns, narrowing the perspective of adult education and training to vocational preparation and economic needs.Such a focus to our policy debates reflects a "trivialization and vulgarization of educational discourse" ((Purpel & McLauren 19) and deflects attention away from the critical need to reconnect educational issues with spirituality and matters of ultimate concern. Spirituality of Adult Education and Trainingredirects our attention and the debate back to matters of the spiritual and the moral, "spirituality is the greatest issue facing us, and it commands our attention and that of our learners" (3).The authors urge us to attend to the spiritual matrix in which our practices are embedded.At the core of their argument is what they refer to as a "secular or public spirituality" (6), a deepening of the meaning and quality of our lives, a yearning to connect with that which is beyond one's self.Building on a rich religious and spiritual heritage in adult education, they argue that this inner energy moves one outward to others and the world, to matters of social justice and change.Such spirituality is most effectively fostered by attending to the ethical and moral dimensions of our practices.The authors develop their perspective by using eight dimensions of spirituality that cut across and include multiple practices and faith traditions [what are they?].By using these dimensions, a comprehensive and theoretically well-grounded understanding of spirituality is developed.While they readily recognize the inevitable differences and even contradictions that such an approach invites, they nonetheless stay well anchored in an overarching interest to describe an inclusive, "big-tent" view of spirituality that involves movement, relationship, and mystery.While some attention is given to incorporating spiritual approaches to teaching and learning, the primary emphasis of this text is on nurturing the

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207