MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560423720 · doi:10.1111/teth.12332

Reading between the Strata: Teaching Rabbinic Literature with Material Culture

2016· article· en· W2560423720 on OpenAlexaff
Gregg E. Gardner

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching Theology & Religion · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTalmudMidrashScholarshipReading (process)JudaismHebrewJewish literatureSociologyTeaching methodJewish cultureHebrew BibleLiteratureJewish studiesBiblical studiesPedagogyHistoryArtPhilosophyLinguisticsArchaeologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article argues that attention to material culture can enhance teaching classical rabbinic literature (Talmud, Midrash, and related Jewish texts from the first seven centuries C.E.) at universities. Following an examination of broader scholarship on teaching and learning on using visuals, this article explores four ways in which material culture can help instructors teach rabbinics to students without background in Jewish studies or the relevant languages (Hebrew, Aramaic). It builds upon teaching other areas of biblical and religious studies (Hebrew Bible, New Testament, and teaching rabbinics at liberal seminaries), research methods, and broader scholarship on using visuals and material culture for pedagogical purposes. Contributing to these fields, this article addresses a lacuna in research on teaching rabbinic literature at secular institutions of higher learning and models ways to bring material culture into religious studies classrooms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching Theology & ReligionSame topicHistorical and Linguistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207