Learning from Little Rock: Arendt on Education, Equality, and Plurality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the burgeoning literature on Hannah Arendt, 'Reflections on Little Rock' has not played a prominent role. In the essay, Arendt criticizes compulsory school desegregation because she sees it as a misguided attempt to achieve social equality through political means. Arendt's critique of school desegregation has usually been dismissed as an example of poor judgment or ignored as an aberrant journalistic intervention with little lasting theoretical significance. Yet the essay advances an interesting analysis of the relationship between education and politics. Drawing on the theoretical framework developed in The Human Condition, she argues that schools should not be sites of political action because this undermines their role in sustaining social and private life. According to Arendt, this way of promoting social equality threatens the pluralism that is fostered in private and necessary for public life. This paper challenges Arendt's conclusions but also draws on her analysis in order to highlight some problems with contemporary theories of democratic education.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; 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".