Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Introduction: Whose Ethics, Which Research?: Mike McNamee. 2. The Principle of Assumed Consent: the Ethics of Gatekeeping: Roger Homan. 3. Opening Windows, Closing Doors: Ethical Dilemmas in Educational Action Research: Les Tickle. 4. Representation, Identification and Trust: Towards an Ethics of Educational Research: Shirley Pendlebury and Penny Enslin. 5. The Ethics of Outsider Research: David Bridges. 6. Codes are Not Enough: What Philosophy can Contribute to the Ethics of Educational Research: Robin Small. 7. The Virtues and Vices of an Educational Researcher: Richard Pring. 8. The Guilt of Whistle--blowing: Conflicts in Action Research and Eduactional Ethnography: Mike McNamee. 9. Accountability and Relevance in Educational Research: Christopher Winch. 10. Educational Philosophy, Theory and Research: A Psychiatric Autobiography: David Carr. 11. Qualitative Versus Quantitative Research Design: A Plea for Paradigmatic Tolerance in Educational Research: Paul Smeyers. 12. Data Return: The Sense of the Given in Educational Research: Paul Standish. Appendix A: British Sociological Association: Statement of Ethical Practice. Appendix B: British Psychological Society Code of Conduct: A code of Conduct for Psychologists. Appendix c: British Educational Research Association: Ethical Guidelines. Appendix D: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada: Tri--Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it