MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2485805819 · doi:10.1017/ccol9780521860543.009

The politics of rhetorical education

2009· book-chapter· en· W2485805819 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhetorical questionExcellencePoliticsSummitCiceroRhetorical devicePolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)LawAestheticsSociologyLiteraturePhilosophyArtLinguisticsCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical rhetorical discourse staked its claim for pedagogical authority on the basis of a string of ideas first and most memorably articulated by Isocrates - that speech is the capacity which, distinguishing human from beast, enables men to live harmoniously in communities, according to nature; that speaking well is thus the summit of human endeavor, helping to establish the rule of law and uphold just government; and consequently, that training in eloquence is the best education, transforming that which makes us human into the stuff of near-divine excellence (aretē). This, the essence of Isocrates' rhetorical theory, became the model apologia for later writers, notably Cicero, who sought an ethical basis for their configuration of education around rhetorical training. Centuries later, Isocrates' thought inspired the early modern European revival of classical pedagogy, engendered at a time when political and economic upheavals rendered it necessary to redefine the goal of education as creating active citizens rather than, as before, nobles, professionals, or priests.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it