Bibliographic record
Abstract
SOCIOLOGY in the secondary-school curriculum has become, if Onot popular and entrenched, at least accepted and established. A 1963 survey by Educational Testing Service indicates that a course which may be classified as being primarily sociological is offered in about a quarter of all public high schools in the country and that approximately half of all such schools include some major topics in their curriculum which are clearly sociological.1 Despite the misgivings of some sociologists, who would reserve sociology for the more mature consideration of college and university students, the American Sociological Association has taken official recognition of secondary-school sociology, first, by organizing its Committee on the Social Studies Curriculum in American Secondary Schools and, second, by sponsoring the Sociological Resources for Secondary Schools project.2 While materials are not yet generally available from the project, it is anticipated that both the materials for a secondary-school course in sociology and materials for supplementary use in other social-studies courses will be available in the near future. This may be an especially good time to consider the place of sociology in the secondary-school curriculum. Quite frankly, while there are doubtless some very good high school sociology courses, it is generally conceded that such courses tend to be ill-conceived and poorly taught. This is largely owing to the fact that there are not standards. To begin with, the course is an elective offered, however widely, on a somewhat haphazard basis to a small percentage of students, many of whom are below average in school achievement. No prestige is gained either from taking or from teaching such a course. Second, relatively few secondary-school teachers have had any substantial work in sociology. Not many are sociology majors and fewer still have had high quality graduate work. Finally, there has been a shortage of really good teaching materials. Given these handicaps, it is not surprising that the high school sociology course has too often emerged as a hodge-podge, a
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 | 0.057 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".