Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active Learning Classrooms (ALCs) are distinguishable by their inclusion of dedicated media technologies, shared tables and wheeled chairs, organised to promote small-group interaction in larger classes. While discursively presented as a panacea to presumed problems of ‘effective’ pedagogy, a multimodal discourse analysis of the ALC highlights how, in the context of discourses of employability and entrepreneurialism, it functions as an apparatus for normalising precarious forms of labour. The ALC should be properly understood as what Bernstein calls a pedagogic device in which knowledge, as the product of social relations, is recontextualised as educational knowledge and in turn becomes the basis for a new set of evaluative criteria. Accordingly, the ALC recontextualises ‘the real world’ and its prioritisation of so-called employable skills in the classroom and in doing so, further legitimises what can be termed, the proceduralisation of pedagogy into a simple repertoire of techniques that can be applied to deliver information to an albeit ‘active’ audience.
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 | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".