When Intellectuals Educate: Chinese Intellectuals and the Educational Project for Chinese Workers in France During the Great War, 1916-1918
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between 1916-1918, a group of Chinese intellectuals opened a school for Chinese workers in France. Using a textbook compiled for the school, Chinese intellectuals taught workers what they felt were the necessary moral and intellectual lessons that would turn workers into supporters and partners in the modernization of China. This paper discusses an analysis of the textbook used for the school, titled “Teaching Materials for the Overseas Chinese Workers’ School” ( huagong xuexiao jiangyii) . In this paper, I argue that intellectuals taught traditional Confucian morals that were reinforced by western values, together with methodologies for the creation of a new history and a new geography for a modernized China. By including workers in the Confucian moral system, and by partnering with them in the creation of new historical and geographical narratives, I argue that this textbook is an early example of a cooperation between Chinese intellectuals and workers. Furthermore, I maintain that this educational project is unique because it includes students in the creation and planning of a nation building project, rather than enforcing a pre-conceived national narrative for them to adopt.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.044 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| 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".