Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biesta's work in last two decades is of the kind that is too often lacking in philosophy of education discourses, or in foundations of education in general: examination that takes education itself, as a whole, as its "unit of analysis," and focuses on what education should mean.The Beautiful Risk of Education continues Biesta's efforts to articulate what in hindsight he refers to as a "theory of education" (p.xi), a theory not only in the descriptive sense but primarily in the normative one.This book is the latter in what can be seen as a series of three books by Gert Biesta.In Beyond Learning: Democratic Education for a Human Future (2006) he develops subjectivity as a central dimension in education through a critique of the dominant discourse of learning in education and an exploration of the notion of "coming into presence."In Good Education in an Age of Measurement (2010) he introduces a broader education framework by adding two other dimensions, qualification and socialization.In The Beautiful Risk of Education (2014) Biesta "focuses on a theme that was implicit in the other two books" (p.x), namely the weakness of education.Biesta believes this theme deserves explicit examination since it has important implications that might assist in engaging with his ideas in practical settings.This review is a good opportunity to take a comprehensive look at Biesta's work, after completing the 'trilogy'.Biesta draws on philosophical texts from a broad range of areas, including ethics, politics, and theology, while at the same time he does not lose sight of his main interest: what is educationally desirable.This is a challenging attempt to combine two allegedly contradictory scholarly approaches: one that rests on other domains and another that seeks to define its own way.Indeed, as can be seen by reading this book in the context of Biesta's corpus, he faces the challenge by honestly engaging with both approaches in a search for a richer way of thinking about education.In The Beautiful Risk of Education Biesta characterizes and argues against "strong" perceptions and practices of education, and explains and exemplifies a "weak" view through seven "themes": creativity, communication, teaching, learning, emancipation, democracy, and what Biesta labels "virtuosity".He defines his idea of "weak education" against current dominant perceptions of education and a "desire to make education strong, secure, predictable, and risk-free" (p.2)."Strong" education is associated with "effective production of pre-defined 'learning outcomes'" and with "a limited set of identities" (ibid.).Biesta argues that this perception of education is a "fundamental misunderstanding of what education is about" (p. 3) since education "isn't a mechanism and shouldn't be turned into one" (p.4).Actually, the educational way is "the slow way, the difficult way, the frustrating way, and, so we might say, the weak way, as the outcome of this
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".