How to Raise an Independent Soviet Citizen? Pedagogic Technologies of the Exemplary Pioneer Camps Artek and Orlyonok (1957–1991)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article discusses attempts to actualize the popular idea of the Soviet child as an active and autonomous subject; specifically, the way this project was realized by counselors and content developers of Artek and Orlyonok, exemplary camps of the USSR, in the 1960–1980s. The study is based on archival documents and retrospective interviews with employees of these children’s centers. The article investigates the reasons that led the ideologists of the Komsomol Central Committee to transform the health facility (where the actions of children were regulated by a strict regime) into a school for so-called pioneers and Komsomol activists (i.e. creative and initiative children) in 1957. Moreover, the reflections of tutors on the methods of implementing this task in the conditions of an “overorganized” institutional order are analyzed. Attention is drawn to the fact that the technology developed in the late Soviet era for raising “self-sufficiency and initiative” in children (triggered by the request of the Komsomol Central Committee) began, over time, to be interpreted by former Artek and Orlyonok employees as a grassroots innovative child-centred approach, defined as radically different from the Soviet pedagogical tradition. To explain the conflict between the appointment of state order and its perception, the article employs the theory of “strategies” and “tactics” developed by Michel de Certeau.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".