Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’une évaluation du débat organisé lors de la production d’un numéro de la revue consacré à l’éducation populaire, il s’agit de rompre avec une approche crozérienne qui situerait les effets du mouvement d’éducation permanente comme effets pervers. Dès lors s’ouvre un nouveau champ de questionnement qui, de la réduction du temps de travail à l’impact des nouvelles technologies — tant industrielles que psychologiques — cherchent à resituer ce qui fait défaut au mouvement : une ignorance quant au rôle de plus en plus social de l’éducation permanente que certains voudraient lui voir jouer. Ce rôle social s’intègre parfaitement au discours que les fractions les plus « prospectives » de la bourgeoisie tiennent à propos d’une équation qui associe moins d’État et plus de responsabilisation des communautés locales, l’éducation permanente saura-t-elle trouver une réponse à ce qui constitue l’enjeu principal de nos sociétés : leur devenir démocratique ?
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.003 |
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".