Wally Seccombe and D.W. Livingstone. "Down to Earth People": Beyond Class Reductionism and Postmodernism.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently there has been much discussion and often acrimonious debate regarding the persistence of class, either as analytical category or as basis for identity, in the social transformations marking the contemporary era of 'postmodernity.'In Down to Earth People, Wally Seccombe and D.W. Livingstone, both sociologists at the Ontario Institute for Stud- ies in Education (OISE), seek to move beyond a class centric analysis of group action while maintaining a materialist analysis.While recognizing the limitations of Marxist 'class reductionism,' the authors are not prepared to say goodbye to the working class or class struggle as factors of social change as some critics of Marxism have done.Class is far from dead.As they note, class divisions are still deeply important for understanding contemporary societies.The authors prefer to develop a more integrative and comprehensive analysis of the (re)production of inequality.This volume itself results from two research projects carried out over more than a decade in Hamilton, Ontariothe "Steelworker Families Project" and the "Hamilton Families Project" and is a reworking of the final chapter of an earlier book based upon these lengthy studies.The authors' research involved extensive interviews, discussions and surveys providing a rich diversity of information.The book begins with a look at economic transformations of the post- war years and their attendant impacts upon working-class families.Volume 16, 2000The authors found, interestingly, that workers view society in a tripar- tite manner, including bosses, workers and the unemployed against Volume 16, 2000 9.5
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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".