Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By way of background, the notion of “unlearning” has a strong history of critique in the field of public education, first tied to Kantian Enlightenment with the overturning of self-induced forms of immaturity, and then the failure of Enlightenment. The movement here has been from the desire for knowledge to not wanting knowledge at all. Contemporary discussions on the complex of unlearning emerge from post-war thought: for example, within Adorno’s essay “Education after Auschwitz,” and within the postcolonial theory of Fanon’s Black Skin, White Masks and Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and also femi-nist pedagogy’s consciousness-raising procedures and queer pedagogy’s deconstruction of normalcy. By the early 1970s, “un-learning racism, sexism, and homophobia” became a structural feature of curriculum in university classrooms. With critical pedagogy, the turn was to ideological critique and knowledge of the mechanisms of social inequality, thereby inciting a pro-liferation of pedagogical orientations for liberation. Problems ensued, however, with the question of pedagogy and, with the emphasis on reading and writing, literary theorists such as Shoshanna Felman, Barbara Johnson, and Eve Kosofsky Sedg-wick rewrote the question of learning with Lacanian, Kleinian, and Freudian theories that considered the status of the uncon-scious and symptoms of learning and not learning. It is here that knowledge and ignorance became a fraught couple. I considered many of these uneven developments — the foremost is with the mismatch between teaching and learning — in my earlier book, Novel Education: Psychoanalytic Studies of Learning and not Learning (New York: Peter Lang Press, 2006).
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it