Bibliographic record
Abstract
Celebrating the importance of pedagogy in the founding editor’s original vision for Modern Drama, this article begins and ends with a memoir of A. C. Edwards, who taught Marvin Carlson, the author’s future doctoral mentor, and later the author himself at the University of Kansas. “In our days,” Edwards wrote in the Foreword to the first issue of this journal in May of 1958, “it is too often assumed that research is the handmaiden of publication, whereas, as we all know, scholarly research may be done only in order to improve one’s teaching.” He practiced in his classroom what he preached. Trained as a medievalist in Old English philology at the University of Iowa, Edwards taught the dynamic relationship between written and spoken words, not only in Chaucer and Shakespeare but also in modern drama. A key technical challenge for modern dramatists, philologically understood, is how to represent unspoken thought. At this Henrik Ibsen excelled, and others have followed. Reading for “subtext,” therefore, becomes both a compelling pedagogical approach and a rehearsal method, as demonstrated here by three first-hand accounts of faculty-directed student productions of plays by Ibsen and Suzan-Lori Parks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".