MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781750392 · doi:10.5195/dpj.2018.234

M. M. Bakhtin as a University Professor

2018· article· en· W2781750392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nikolai L Vasiliev

Bibliographic record

VenueDialogic Pedagogy A Journal for Studies of Dialogic Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussian Literature and Bakhtin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflexivityPerceptionTastePsychologyPedagogyQuarter (Canadian coin)Mathematics educationSociologySocial scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents M. M. Bakhtin as a University professor through his own views of on the nature of university teaching: lecturing, seminars and colloquia, engaging students in debates and reflexive analysis of literary texts, “scientific thinking”, and working with bibliography. As a Chair of Russian and Foreign Literature department of the Mordovian National Pedagogical Institute (later the Mordovia State University), for a quarter of a century, Bakhtin was promoting teaching approaches that would support students’ informed, independent, analytical and reflexive learning. According to the minutes from different department meetings at his university, over the years, Bakhtin struggled to define and improve his own guidance and teaching in the Literature studies and the overall work of his department. His three pedagogical goals for a literary lecture were: 1) Communication of certain information on a given topic - establishing the level of students’ familiarity with the topic; 2) Fostering students’ scientific thinking; and 3) Fostering students’ aesthetic perception and taste. Some of his former students emphasized his erudition, pedagogic skill, and ability to stimulate his students’ imagination and reflective thinking.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.011

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.386 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDialogic Pedagogy A Journal for Studies of Dialogic EducationSame topicRussian Literature and Bakhtin StudiesFrench-language works237,207