Book Review: Transnational Perspectives on Culture, Policy, and Education: Redirecting Cultural Studies in Neoliberal Times, Journey into Dialogic Pedagogy, Labor of Learning: Market and the Next Generation of Educational Reform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The volume follows in what is becoming for McCarthy a determined tradition of critical analysis and cultural agency.Most certainly this recent publication does all of that, although McCarthy & Teasley also offer the reader something new.While the thematic focus of this volume does not deviate from the 'critical' agenda, the mechanisms of engagement do incorporate an 'exercise of transgression' that marks a departure from a more predictable cultural studies approach.Promoted as a product of transatlantic cooperation in both 'translation' and 'relationality', this collection is said to engender a 'radical contexualization' of predictable centres of inquiry in resisting and deprivileging hegemonic epistemologies of collection and categorization.The stated intention of the book, then, is to encourage 'multiple-border crossing', resisting the Anglo-centred dominance in forms of cultural critique and inquiry.McCarthy & Teasley speak to one of the most intractable criticisms levelled against the field of cultural studies as a historical approach -the criticism of 'Britishness'.Arguably, with cultural studies both mapping and navigating a centreperiphery field of research engagement, the ideals and processes of Western governance scribe a point of reference and divergence.This can result in the traditions and forms of articulated cultural agency resonating in prescriptive ways.The challenge, then, is erected in opposition to the predictability of academic stability, or forms of institutional persistence manifested in centreperiphery models of research and action.This collection attempts to reposition and, to a degree, redefine the task of cultural studies.In doing so, it brings to bear alternative criteria to the intended task of identifying and addressing neo-liberal modalities of economic and cultural dominance.Included here would be the growing effects of expanding 'corporatism' and the 're-feudalization' of the public sphere.Contributors to this collection are marked as outsiders to the field of cultural studies.Educators, policy makers and other stakeholders are asked to connect with linguists and economists, and these academic and national exchanges promote a cross-cultural dialogue, one repositioned through this author/reader association of translation and relationality.For the editors, the act of translation (taken in the literal sense for many of these articles) bridges cultural gaps that historically have stood as barriers to an effective transformational project.That is, the act of 'cultural translation' facilitates the reciprocity and 'mutual respect' required in mounting a truly intercultural response to the neo-liberal challenge.Contributors represent a broad background of academic and transnational attachments, coming from fields such as psychology, linguistics, English philology, communications studies, sociology and anthropology.They also reveal a diversity of national affiliations that include Argentina, Barbados, El Salvador, Korea, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.With the majority of the contributors writing from outside of the field of cultural studies, the criticism of Britishness is circumvented in exchange for an alternative politic, one promoting fair representation in sponsoring an acceptable quality of life for global populations.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.008 |
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".