L’écho de l’Education nouvelle au sein de l’Ecole Ferrer lausannoise (1910–1921)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A little private school, libertarian and alternative, existed in Lausanne for about 10 years (1910–1919). It was named after Francisco Ferrer, the Catalan educationist, free‐thinker and freemason, who was executed after the ‘deadly week’ in Barcelona in 1909. One of the school’s main organizers was the libertarian physician Jean Wintsch. The enterprise was undertaken within a more general movement of libertarian schools, and was related broadly to the New Education movement. However, it was distinguished by its emphasis on its working character. Investment by militants in educational matters enabled them to keep alive their effective hopes for social changes. It also enabled them to expose how l’Etat bourgeois took over educational affairs. An educational report was published at the time to expose the progressive experience and to defend it against attacks from official circles. In these texts, one can find more talk about projects and intentions than effective implementations. The main actors’ state of mind is clear though. Among the most interesting educationist principles that were expressed in the Ferrer school report is the idea that the strength of educational renovation lies in the people and that school content must address its specific understanding. Pupils had to be able to proceed by trial and error, to exercise, and to discover for themselves how to break away. Organizers of this little school in Lausanne then sought to fire pupils’ imagination without imposing any ready‐made truths. These alternative educational practices also concerned the question of discipline. In the Ferrer school, children were not punished but were trusted. Priority was given to mutual aid methods within coeducation rather than all forms of authoritarianism. These options were discussed and required justifications that were regularly quoted in the published texts. Although the effective educational implementations of the Lausanne experience were very modest, it is striking to establish to what extent some educational options asserted at that time are still of current interest at the beginning of the twenty‐first century.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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.
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".