DREAMING OF DISSENT: ROCHDALE COLLEGE AND THE FAILED DREAM OF COMMUNAL EDUCATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper looks at experimental alternative education systems to explore different approaches to pedagogical theories of post-secondary education. The paper focuses on the story of Rochdale College, an experimental free-form college and communal housing project associated with the University of Toronto between 1968 and 1975. The aims, theories and methods of Rochdale College are contextualized by an examination of two theorists on alternative education: John Dewey and Paul Goodman. The theories of Dewey and Goodman are explored through a brief examination of two experimental colleges that preceded Rochdale: The Experimental College (at Tufts University from 1927-32) and Black Mountain College in North Carolina (active from 1933- 57). Ideas regarding alternative forms of education were integrated into socio-political ideas from the 1960s counterculture movement in America and Canada, and a major test site for a form of counterculture education was the controversial experiment called Rochdale College. The paper explores ideas of what an alternative post-secondary education system has looked like in the past, in order to pose questions about the ways it could take shape in the future.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".