The Touch of the Present: Educational Encounters, Aesthetics, and the Politics of the Senses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Touch of the Present is a deeply personal book. In teaching I have frequently referred to Foucault’s distinction between the author and the writer, in which the name of the author does not refer to the person writing, but serves a ‘classificatory function’ which ‘permits one to group together a certain number of texts, define them, differentiate them from and contrast them to others. In addition, it establishes a relationship among the texts’ (Foucault 1984: 107). In The Touch of the Present we encounter ‘Sharon Todd’, the author of works such as Learning from the Other: Levinas, Psychoanalysis, and Ethical Possibilities in Education (2012) and Toward an Imperfect Education: Facing Humanity, Rethinking Cosmopolitanism (2015). The author name signals a relationship between these texts, a continuity of ethical and political concerns and how these make demands of education, as well as a shared focus on pedagogical relations in which we encounter others in their alterity and diversity. However, in this book we also encounter ‘Sharon Todd’, the writer and, having heard some of her students speak about her, the teacher. This is where the book gets personal.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".