Agir par mim?tisme: la Commission europ?enne et sa politique d'?ducation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decision-makers do not act in a policy vacuum. As they develop their programmes, they are aware of and influenced by available historical examples. If we look closely at the European Commission's education policy (measures as well as discourses), we notice the exis tence of similarities in the strategies that it deploys in this field and dynamics deployed much earlier by states engaged in nation-building (i.e. the redefinition of people' spatial representa tion of their community of belonging; the creation of a framework of shared values; and the process of 'detemporalisation-naturalisation'). This observation leads us to believe that if the European Commission decided to get involved in the field of education at an early stage in the integration process, it was not only?as most people believe?to insure an effective implementation of the Common market in 1957 or of the Single Market in 1987. Rather, through its education policy, the Commission also hopes to create and foster a EU identity that the founding fathers and subsequent 'Europeans' consid ered necessary for achieving their goals of creating ? an ever closer union ?. qui soulignent, depuis la fin des ann?es 90 surtout, l'existence d'un lien entre certaines initiatives de l'Union et le d?veloppement d'une identit? europ?enne (pour une vue d'ensemble voir Shore, 2000). Par exemple, nous trouvons un nombre consid?rable d'analyses dans lesquelles les auteurs d?crivent l'euro comme un ? vecteur d'identit? europ?enne ? (par exemple : Ancori et Koenig, 2002; Risse, 2003). Dans d'autres ?tudes, les chercheurs s'interrogent sur une possible relation entre l'?mergence d'une identit? europ?enne et la cr?ation, ? l'?chelle communautaire, de symboles comme le drapeau ou encore l'hymne europ?en (par exem ple, Lager, 1994; Shore, 1993), le d?veloppement d'une citoyennet? europ?enne (Meehan, 1993; Wiener, 1997), d'une politique culturelle ou linguistique de l'Union (Sassatelli, 2002), ou encore l'essor d'une poli tique europ?enne d'information dans le secteur de l'audio-visuel et des medias (Schlesinger, 1999; Theiler 1999b). Troisi?mement, enfin, dans de nombreuses ?tudes, anciennes comme r?centes, th?oriques comme empiriques, les auteurs montrent qu'il existe des liens ?troits entre la construction des ?tats-nations et le d?veloppe ment d'une scolarit? obligatoire et la?que (voir, par exemple : Durkheim, 1985 [1922]; Gellner, 1983; Balibar et Wallerstein, 1988; Green, 1990; Soysal, 2002; Schleicher, 1993). This content downloaded from 157.55.39.32 on Mon, 10 Oct 2016 04:18:45 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".