Bibliographic record
Abstract
It was with sadness that I learned this spring that our founding editor, Paul O'Leary, had died.I had met Paul at our Canadian Philosophy of Education Society (CPES) conferences, and I had often found myself thinking about his excellent work as editor as I selected articles from our back catalogue for our "From the Archives" feature.Paideusis, as the journal was then called, published a great deal of excellent work under Paul's editorship, and now that I have become an editor myself, I have much more appreciation for his work in founding and editing the journal.Paul faced significant challenges that Philosophical Inquiry in Education's current editors do not: He and the rest of his team had to figure out how launch a journal from scratch, deal with the challenges of the print format, and sustain interest in a fledgling publication.Paul clearly worked hard to do this.In 1987's inaugural issue, he wrote:Paideusis's purpose is to stimulate a conspicuous Canadian presence in the field and to facilitate scholarly communication among those seriously interested in philosophy of education.While the journal's focus is philosophical, it will not function as a closed shop in which only those who are "certified" philosophers of education can work.Indeed, we hope that the journal will be read and contributed to by those who, although not formally philosophers of education, are nonetheless drawn to philosophical problems by virtue of their work in areas such as curriculum, psychology, law and sociology.Thirty years later, we still remain true to this original mission.Paul titled his inaugural editorial, "That the First Shall Not Be the Last," and thanks to the support of the Canadian philosophy of education community, the journal is still going strong.To recognize and remember Paul, we have decided to print a selection of tributes to him that were compiled by Sandra Bruneau and presented at the 2017 meeting of CPES.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".