Bertolet, Anna Riehl, and Carole Levin, eds. Creating the Premodern in the Postmodern Classroom: Creativity in Early English Literature and History Courses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fifth, and final, chapter both presents the aftermath of Margarida's trial and reflects on the study as a whole.In particular, Bednarski analyzes the microhistory he has just presented.In particular, he tells the reader of his reasons for a particular interpretation or line of enquiry, which complements the pedagogical strengths of this study.The case of Margarida de Portu is a fascinating one, and Bednarski's detailed archival work has yielded a rich source base.At the same time, his nuanced presentation and engaging language, together with self-reflective analysis, would work well for classroom use: particularly for advanced undergraduate students or those beginning postgraduate study.The ideal secondary source for a classroom is one that shows students what the world of scholarship looks like.Bednarski's careful analysis and remarkable self-reflexivity reveal the potential problems of a microhistory, while showing students how to assess, evaluate, and piece together problematic historical evidence.Moreover, Bednarski reminds the reader that there are further discoveries to be made and alternate ways to read evidence.From this, one can hope that Bednarski's study will encourage students to gain the skills he presents here.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".