Filling in the blanks: The Anti-Cahn Anthology of Alternative Classic and Contemporary Readings in the Philosophy of Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article arose as a critical response to the second edition of Classic and Contemporary Readings in the Philosophy of Education (2012) edited by Steven M. Cahn (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Lissa Paul, a professor in the Faculty of Education, Brock University in the Niagara region of Ontario, Canada, assigned Cahn’s anthology as the core text in a postgraduate course she taught in the winter of 2021: ‘The right to education: Historical frameworks’. As the course was designed to interrogate the philosophical grounds of (primarily North American) pedagogical practices, the masculine, Eurocentric biases of Cahn’s anthology mirror those underlying our educational institutions. In response to those biases, the five students in the class addressed Cahn’s errors of both omission and commission by developing something like a prospectus or book proposal for what Lissa dubbed the Anti-Cahn Anthology of Classic and Contemporary Readings in the Philosophy of Education. In this article each student contributes a rationale for the inclusion of someone ‘missing’ from Cahn’s book and suggestions for selections from key texts. Adriana Brook writes on the medieval African-Islamic scholar Ibn Khaldun, Jessi Skye on the eighteenth-century Indigenous philosopher Handsome Lake, Rebekah Carlsson on the famous advocate of early childhood education, Maria Montessori, Jessica Dieleman on the late African American scholar bell hooks and Breanne Wilde on Jules Gill-Peterson and histories of the transgender child.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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".