Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noting that journalism education has fallen short of the mark set for it in a visionary essay published by Joseph Pulitzer in 1904, the author analyzes Pulitzer's arguments and then makes a case for strengthening the education of journalists. It is argued that an education for a life as a journalist calls for an immersion in news judgement, the development of university-based skills in evidence gathering and fact assessment, formation in the best literary and/or visual methods of representation, and an under-standing of how to apply the forms of understanding born in the academy to the problems of the here and now. It also involves a careful grounding in the languages, purposes and practices of democratic institutions. Journalism education will be strengthened by a careful reconsideration of the concept of journalism, by a parallel reconsideration of the scholarly tasks supporting the teaching of journalism, and a careful articulation between core journalism subjects and cognate academic disciplines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".