Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay imagines how the “quasi-philosophy” of Alfred Jarry (1873–1907) might function as a fulcrum for overturning the legacy of “standard” thinking and writing now profuse within the Educacene, or rather, the epoch of globalized educational standardization. This essay will consider how Jarry’s pataphysics or science of imaginary solutions initiates a new image of thought by suspending the Educacene’s naming of reality and by inducing alien axiomatics capable of producing new forms of thought and relation. In place of critical theory’s arguable inertia within educational scholarship, Jarry’s “pataphysics” founds an “ironic theory” that curtails the expectations in which “standard” modes of academic thought and writing continue to labor. In this vein, “pataphysics” might be understood astride the “non-philosophy” of Francois Laruelle as a mode of thinking philosophy dishabituated from those automatic models and methods in which contemporary thought is founded. In this vein, the ultimate aim of the essay is to re-envision the so-called “planned curriculum” as a cite for fabulating new thoughts and practice. This task is fomented by deploying pataphysical thinking in order to produce a heresy against the dogma of “standard” educational thought, and moreover, to subtract the Real from its capture in the rigidified forms of “standard” educational thought. In general, this essay attends to two ideas integral to the field of curriculum studies. First, the essay attempts a radical rereading of Canadian curriculum scholar Ted Aoki’s idea of “planned” and “lived” curriculum. Such rereading posits that we might think of both the lived and planned curriculum as a fulcrum for relaunching education and its theorization. Second, the essay advances the developments of speculative pataphysics as a means to circumvent the division of curricular thought into the two distinct territories of planned and lived formations, herein habilitating a renewed approach to the powers of accelerated abstraction and simulation.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.007 |
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".