“Reading guidance as a part of Guidance”: A popular philosophy of reading guidance in Japan developed by Michio Namekawa in the 1940s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the author examines the development of Michio Namekawa’s philosophy on reading guidance, dokusho shido, which has been since the late 1940s one of the two pillars of school library philosophy in Japan. Namekawa is recognized as one of the key persons to cultivate the practice and philosophy of reading guidance in post-war Japan. To conduct the research, the author collects and examines all of Namekawa’s historical documents from the pre- to early post- WWII periods, when he developed his theory of reading guidance. The author finds that Namekawa’s philosophy can partially be traced back to the war period at which time a children’s cultural improvement movement occurred. Then, under the occupation after the war, the CIE Education Division led Namekawa to shape his philosophy and curriculum more concretely. Around 1949, he found important components of the concept of integrating reading guidance into a students’ personal life-Guidance, which Namekawa maintained throughout the post-war period.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".