MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Care Ethics in Universities: Beyond an Easy “Add and Stir” Solution

2019· article· es· W2989616138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Victoria Vázquez Verdera

Bibliographic record

VenueEncounters in Theory and History of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El trabajo de Nel Noddings ha representado un profundo desafío para el pensamiento androcéntrico en filosofía de la educación. El documento plantea la cuestión de si la ética del cuidado podría agregarse a las políticas universitarias. Para lograr este objetivo, se explora si la incorporación de la ética del cuidado en las políticas universitarias transformaría la orientación de la investigación, la administración universitaria y la experiencia de aprendizaje en tu totalidad. Más adelante, el documento analiza las implicaciones del significado de la ética del cuidado de Noddings como un vía para abordar la moralidad aplicada a los entornos universitarios. Finalmente, el artículo concluye ofreciendo la ética del cuidado como una alternativa a las teorías éticas tradicionales en base a sus puntos fuertes que convergen en la posibilidad real de formar mejores adultos.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.379 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncounters in Theory and History of EducationSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207