Jon Shelton, The Education Myth: How Human Capital Trumped Social Democracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
views it as weeding out those who were not fit to represent the brand.This book is not intended as a "take-down" of Morehouse or its graduates.Indeed, in providing her brilliant conceptual framework as to what is shaping the actions of the institution, Grundy identifies a path forward.The most hopeful part of her book focuses on the student body, their evolving approach to gender, and how they are clear-eyed about the failings of the administration.Students are demanding more.Her interviews also reveal significant personal growth among some of the graduates who look back with remorse at how they made the campus a less-than-welcoming place for their classmates who did not conform to the expected social or gender norms.One graduate describes arriving on campus as being the first time he experienced the full spectrum of Black manhood, and all of his internalized stereotypes about who Black men are fell away.Grundy exposes the untapped potential of Morehouse to be a place where all Black men, in all their incarnations, can thrive.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".