MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406326266 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v55i1.190633

Book Review: Learning in a Time of Abundance: Learning in a Time of Abundance: The Community is the Curriculum

2025· article· en· W4406326266 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brenna Clarke Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbundance (ecology)CurriculumSociologyMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning in a Time of Abundance: The Community is the Curriculum reviewed by Managing the abundance of information-or bleaker still, content-in our lives is an ongoing challenge for us all.It is certainly a classroom issue: Does it make sense to teach content and insist on rote memorization in a world where students carry all the information of the whole discipline on a device in their pockets?But it is also a problem we all face outside of the classroom: How do we manage partisan political messaging, health misinformation, and biased news as it floods out of the same devices in our own pockets?Enter Dave Cormier, who shares in Learning in a Time of Abundance: The Community is the Curriculum his prescription for beginning to manage this load.He suggests the importance of three literacies for the twenty-first century: humility, informed trust, and the ability to apply values to decision making as the place where welearners, teachers, and everyone-must start.Humility is the choice not to weigh in on matters that we don't really know about; to only contribute when our contribution makes things better.Informed trust is about checking the sources that inform our thinking and sharing those sources openly.And applying our values means interrogating and being aware of the values that underpin our practice now, and being willing to change those practices that don't serve our core values.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.035

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207