MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231303287 · doi:10.1002/(issn)1939-4225

New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development

2023· paratext· en· W4231303287 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development · 2023
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNew horizonsResource (disambiguation)Mathematics educationGeologyPsychologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The second half of the 20th century featured considerable formalization of the structures of adult education in North America.There was significant commitment to building theoretical perspectives, graduate programs, and professional organizations around what had primarily been a voluntary set of educational activities.Malcolm Knowles was a key player in these efforts, contributing a great deal to what, at the time, seemed like the right moves for the field to be making.One of those contributions was the "big idea" of andragogy.John Henschke worked with Knowles from his earliest involvement with andragogy in the late 1960s and built his career around the concept.Henschke taught and consulted internationally on andragogy, both theoretically and practically, and contributed a strong corpus of writing on the topic.He identifies himself as the first PhD student to complete a dissertation on Knowlesian andragogy, graduating in 1973 from Boston University with a dissertation consisting of a biographical portrait of Knowles (Cooper, 2008).As somebody who is fascinated by the history of adult education, I was looking forward a great deal to the opportunity to engage with Henschke's text.Based on the title, it would be reasonable to expect a deep and broad reflection on the development, meaning, and implementation of the notion of andragogy.These expectations did not fully match the reality of the resource offered by this book.The task Henschke set himself was to answer the question "what are the major foundational English language works published on andragogy anywhere in the world that may provide a clear and understandable linkage between the research on andragogy and the practice of andragogy throughout the globe within the field of HRD and Adult Education?"(p. 6).The response to this question takes the form of a series of annotated bibliographies almost 400 pages long.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.335 · 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