Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a written account of a keynote presentation given at the Council of Outdoor Educators of Ontario, annual conference in Canada. The conference themes included revival of the hand-made and Folk Schools. This article outlines the dramatic effects and hand-made props used to present an “unplugged” presentation that was simultaneously humourous and educational. The presentation began by drawing upon research from the field of anthropology that links the historical development of the brain with early flint-knapping skills. Following the introduction a rationale for understanding the importance of fibre and edge technology was conveyed. An exploration of hand skills was further explored by examining some materials and the design aspects involved in making clothing. The later part of the article describes the child developmental ideas that correspond with Waldorf Handwork programs and outlines the origin of two of North America’s largest Folk Schools. Short narrations occur throughout the paper and are used to emphasize the way making things with our hands link human’s environmental survival to human development and education. The paper concludes with three short stories that emphasize the importance of using our hands in conjunction with our minds to make the stuff of life we need to live.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".