RITES OF PASSAGE: A STEPPING STONE TOWARDS TOLERANCE IN AN EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The project Rites of Passage was initiated in 2009 by Mix!t A forum for research, documentation and education in living/together (University College Gent, BE). It wishes to contribute to the creation of tools for social workers in their action for a more harmonious society by bringing attention to the value of both the diversity and similarities between different people and peoples. Through the recognition of the in the otherness of the other, we tend to be more open to this same otherness and the alterity of other cultures. Rites of passage are for a social worker a unique lever to stimulate mutual tolerance between people. Recognition and acknowledgment come into being by referring to the universality of these rites of passage (birth, adolescence, marriage, death) while at the same time offering a possibility to share what is particular to our own culture. This project collects information about rites of passage in various cultures, philosophies and religions. The information is compiled in two books (Vankerckhove & Vens (eds.), 2010, Overgangsrituelen, Standaard Uitgeverij: Gent & Devloo & Vens (eds.), 2012, Passages, Academia Press) and is used in educational parcels on tolerance (De Kock & Vankerckhove et.al. 2012, Overgangsrituelen: Bouwstenen voor verdraagzaamheid, Standaard Uitgeverij). In addition we organize exhibitions, lectures and seminars on this theme. All activities of Mix!t have the same central objective of creating more tolerance in our society. In all projects we have chosen an exemplary approach. Other practice oriented research projects concern elderly migrants, integration processes, cascade in educational systems, marital migration etc. In this specific project we work with and about rites of passage in different philosophies and religions namely in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Secular humanism, Hinduism, Buddhism and in some cultures: the aboriginals, the Inuit, the Kuna Indians and the Betamaribe.
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 | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.114 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.032 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.028 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".