Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article, Ilya Zrudlo unpacks the educationally limiting effects of conflicting visions of the good embedded in Western modernity and offers a developmental vision of modernity for education that is more coherent and productive of student agency. Drawing on Charles Taylor's work, Zrudlo disarticulates four aspects of Western modernity — economic modernization, the struggle for justice, individualism, and naturalism — and highlights the internal contradictions to which they give rise that limit student agency. Harry Brighouse's On Education is then examined in order to illustrate how one influential account attempts to bring together the different educational goods of Western modernity. Despite its strengths, Brighouse's account struggles to comprehensively integrate the different goods of Western modernity and also implies a claim to historical finality, both of which hamper student agency. To overcome these obstacles, Zrudlo suggests that we distinguish between Western modernity and modernity tout court, and that the latter can be conceived of as a period of transition, akin by analogy to a period of adolescence moving toward maturity. The purpose of education from this developmental perspective would be to foster in students the kind of agency required to transition toward maturity as individuals, as well as to contribute to a movement toward maturity at the collective level, in their own communities. Drawing on the work of Lewis Mumford, Zrudlo suggests that individuals on their way to maturity strive to comprehensively and coherently develop their capacities to contribute the greater share of their powers to the development of diverse and unified communities that are organically integrated into a new, global civilization.
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 | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".