Rethinking Readings About the Past of School and Education Between Worlds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces the book Rethinking Centre-Periphery Assumptions in the History of Education: Exchanges Among Brazil, USA, and Europe, recently published by Routledge, as a result of the FAPESP Thematic Project No. 2018/26699–4 entitled Knowledges and practices at the borders: for a transnational history of education (1810–). It is structured in two parts. The first part evinces the exchanges established between Brazil and the USA, with a focus on the circulation of subjects and pedagogical models. The narrative starts in 1884 with the trip of Maria Guilhermina Loureiro to the USA and extending to 1960 with the connections between New Education and Modern Architecture. Along the way, it deals with the education debates carried out in the state of São Paulo around the writing of the report Education in the State of São Paulo (1903), and the sojourn of Brazilian educators in the Columbia University Teachers College (NY) from 1920 to 1960. In the second part, the circle is widened, incorporating the exchanges with Europe, particularly with France, England, and Portugal. Here we conduct analyses about the circulation of artifacts such as desks, parietal charts, and school manuals, as well as of models of representation such as Pictorialism photography. Keywords: networks, center-periphery, transnational history of education
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".