Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the issues of reforming education in transitional periods of historical development. An attempt is made to compare two eras of innovative transformations - the time of Peter the Great's educational reforms (the first quarter of the XVIII century) and the recent period of our history (the 90s of the XX century - present. time). These difficult periods have a lot in common: the radical restructuring of school education, the transition to Western European models in culture, the rejection of traditional, "old" spiritual forms of education and training. Both reforms had different goals and consequences: in the Peter the Great period it was a search for new knowledge and new meanings of education, in the modern era it was an attempt to completely rethink and remake the Soviet education system.The time of Peter's reforms was evaluated by Russian thinkers in different ways, but almost everyone saw them as a process of modernization of society, an attempt to put it on new technological rails. Liberal and Westernizing thinkers evaluated Peter's reforms exclusively in a positive way, considering them a real revolution in the field of education, which led Russia to an unprecedented strengthening and flourishing. A galaxy of conservative thinkers who assessed the transformations of Peter I as a "storm" and a "thunderstorm" that overturned the old "Moscow" education, believed that they were inevitable, but had many negative consequences, in particular, the division of education into spiritual and secular, uncritical borrowing of its content from the Western European tradition, the forcible planting of schools alien to the spirit of the population.Modern innovative transformations, which are largely contradictory in nature, are still waiting for the evaluation by researchers and teachers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".