MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379741126 · doi:10.1353/esc.2009.a404818

Smarty Pants

2009· article· en· W4379741126 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Nicola Nixon

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish studies in Canada · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuspectIntellectAestheticsArtArt historyVisual artsSociologyHistoryPhilosophyCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smarty Pants Nicola Nixon (bio) A few weeks before the ESC-sponsored academic fashion panel occurred in Montreal, I mentioned to a few of my colleagues that I would be participating, and each promptly asked the same question: What are you going to wear? Their foremost concern was not what I might say but, to borrow from Kaja Silverman, what “vestimentary ‘package’” I would be displaying (147). Ranging around for the most outré option, I hit on the armadillo shoe, which, with its foot-high heels and hoof-like structure, would be guaranteed to place me firmly at the centre of various controversies about their supposed dangers to their wearers or line me up with Lady Gaga—herself an aficionado of the armadillo shoe—not to mention giving me a towering Shaquille-O’Neal-like presence. Alas, since Alexander McQueen’s death, those shoes have been scarce on the ground- Still, my colleagues’ question is provocative, not simply because it assumes that dress is an intrinsic aspect of public performance, especially one billed as concerned with academic fashion, but also because it runs counter to what many members of the professoriate seem to assume—that sartorial resplendence is suspect, mere superficial fluff distracting attention from the meaty intellect it shrouds, or that fashionable dress is a sellout—to [End Page 24] capitalism, big business, what Roland Barthes dubs the fashion system, or all things perceived to be anathema to the life of the mind. What’s fashionable now at universities is not, luckily, the dress of their professors but the supposed free dissemination of the fruits of that non-sartorially nurtured life of the mind, from the open access to periodicals to the establishment of accessible repositories of pre- and postpublished articles—all in the name of the democratic flow of ideas across national and economic boundaries, in the name of “benefits for ... society” and the “public good” (Shearer 2, 5). A globalization policy, if you will, of the intellectual resources of the first world “haves” aimed apparently at the developing world “have nots”—those unfortunate enough to have skimpy libraries, low acquisition budgets, and no political will to obtain the academic riches of the West that are available at a fairly steep price (for subscriptions, reprints, or aggregators). Nowhere is this seeming public good more pronounced than in the so-called global classroom: the free Web lectures offered by such institutions as Yale, with its OpenYaleCourses, and the pioneering mit, with its OpenCourseWare, which provide videotaped professors lecturing a full complement of classes for a course, sometimes to an room full of actual students and sometimes directly to the camera. These courses have in turn produced their own stars: Walter H.G. Lewin, a physics professor at mit who is the top ranked or most viewed professor on iTunes U, was interviewed in the U.S. News under the headline banner “Physics Superstar,” and The New York Times Magazine, in two separate full-length articles in 2007 and 2008, effused that he was “box office gold” (Heffernan). Naturally their dramatically higher visibility than that of most professors (to the tune of many hundreds of thousands of hits on YouTube) invites the most pressing question: What do they wear? Well, across the board, most of the male professors wear partly rolled, long-sleeved polycotton shirts and baggy, pleated chinos. Introducing the open classroom video of his course, “Introduction to Non-Violence” at University of California Berkeley, Michael Nagler tells the students not to mind the video camera, reassuring them that “All it means is that I’m dressed up a little nicer than I usually am,” and he wears a blue, rolled sleeve shirt over a white T-shirt and chinos. In the global classroom, most of the female professors wear solid, dark-coloured, jersey-type shirts and black trousers, with the occasional single strand of pearls or long dowdy scarf. Lewin, the physics superstar, wears the same rolled chambray shirt and bland chinos combo, with the added flair of socks and sandals. Not an armadillo shoe in sight. [End Page 25] Asked by Kim Clark in the U.S. News interview whether the video tapings of his lectures made...

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish studies in CanadaSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207