Bibliographic record
Abstract
I It is necessary that a man should dwell with solicitude on, and cleave with affection to, the things which he wishes to remember.--Thomas Aquinas, paraphrasing the Ad Herennium (cited in Yates 1974, 75) I've recently reading Mary Carruthers' work on the medieval arts memory (2002, 2003, 2005) as well as Francis Yates' wonderful work The Art Memory (1974) and Brian Stock's (1983) work on 11th and 12th century images written language. This study began on the advice Michelle Bastock, a recent Ph.D. graduate the University Calgary whose wonderful dissertation on the relation between word and image opened up for me this new area exploration and intrigue (see Bastock 2005; Bastock & Jardine 2006). I was especially interested in these matters for a couple reasons. First, in my work in elementary schools, rarely do I hear teachers and students talking about memory except perhaps under the guise rote memorisation spelling lists and the like. However, and in direct contradiction to this, some classrooms I've witnessed (intriguingly, very often the youngest grades) are taking on the task remembering in a different way. They are exploring ancestries, who has travelled down this road before me, where these old objects in our house have come from, and whose hands handed them to us, and so on. They are asking themselves the question what is it that is important to remember, and whose story is this anyway, and how shall we proceed, given what we now know and cannot pretend to forget. (1) This gracious, difficult work (work, not rote memorization, but of, somehow, cultivating the something memorable) plays with an etymological twist hidden in Hans-Georg Gadamer's Truth and Method (1989, 240-262)--the German-rooted relatedness (Erfahrung) and ancestors/ancestry (Vorfahrung). Experience, here, is imagined as a journey (Fahrung)--an undergoing, a suffering (256-7)--linked to those who have journeyed before us (Vor-). Even the English word experience hints at this sense traverse and surroundings. Experience is what you get out of (Latin ex--) having around (Latin peri). As Gadamer (1989, 260) suggests, becoming experienced in something is akin to coming to know your way around. The link, it seems, is, at least in part, memory. But this is not memory understood as simply the compiling information for later recall. What is at work here is a deeply embodied, fleshy, intimate sense memory and knowledge and their cultivation. These kids I've worked with nearby are each becoming someone because what they have learned and remembered. And this most pedagogical tasks--becoming someone--is linked somehow to places that are traversed, territories that are journeyed through. I'm tempted to push this one step further and suggest that these places or territories, properly understood and taken up, are the topics that curriculum guides entrust to teachers and students in schools. More on this later. This leads me to another pedagogical clue regarding memory that I had found years ago regarding education and learning and the young, a clue which, in part, provides a new spin the interpretive critique Cartesianism that is commonplace in contemporary curriculum theorizing: Education cannot tread the path critical research. Youth demands images for its imagination and for forming its memory. Thus [Giambattista] Vico [b. 1668] supplements the critica Cartesianism with the old topica (Gadamer 1989, 21). Somehow, regarding the path that education must tread if the demands youth (someone new to a place, someone who hasn't especially been around, someone inexperienced) are to be met, images, the process cultivating memory, and topics somehow fit together, and the clear and distinct methodologism Descartes (critica) needs productive, substantive, imaginal, story-laden, allegorical, bloody, bodily, Earthly, supplementation. …
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".