MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999016802 · doi:10.1093/jvcult/vcz064

Object Lessons in Victorian Education: Text, Object, Image

2020· article· en· W2999016802 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea Korda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Victorian Culture · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Education Studies Worldwide
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsObject (grammar)Variety (cybernetics)Meaning (existential)Visual artsCurriculumScripting languageSociologyHistoryMedia studiesAestheticsComputer scienceEpistemologyArtPedagogyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lessons on common objects, known as ‘object lessons’, were a customary occurrence in Victorian schoolrooms. This article looks at Victorian object lessons around mid-century as a means of examining the variety of meanings that common objects, and particularly manufactured objects, might have held both inside and outside Victorian schoolrooms. While model scripts for object lessons circulated widely and clarified the meaning of common objects in print, the objects themselves had the potential to complicate and challenge these meanings. Drawing primarily on publications by Elizabeth Mayo and the Home and Colonial School Society (established in 1836), this article outlines the theological, industrial and imperialist ways of looking that informed the model object lesson. Yet close study of the objects employed in object lessons – feathers, an object lesson specimen box, and a series of illustrations of animals – demonstrates how full sensory engagement with material objects can disrupt these disciplined ways of looking and learning. The final section of the article describes the decline of object lesson pedagogies once they were established within the official curriculum for England and Wales over the course of the 1880s and 1890s. Increasingly, pictures and nature study came to replace common objects in Victorian schoolrooms, and had their own implications for the ways that schoolchildren were taught to look at and learn from the world around them.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.329 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Victorian CultureSame topicHistorical Education Studies WorldwideFrench-language works237,207