A sideways glance – being on an editorial board for 25 years: personal and theological reflections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This theological reflection is based on 25 years of membership of being on the editorial board of the first CONTACT, now Practical Theology. Autoethnographic in style it focuses on the key role of theological reflection and how Practical Theology models and encourages how people can become practical theologians. This includes conscious and unconscious elements focussing on the development of an individual theology alongside key events from each person’s past. Theological reflection emerges out of this personal context, but which is enhanced by being in touch with other practical theologians in varying stages of their development. To this end, Practical Theology, and CONTACT before it, offered a place to belong, a community of people engaged in shared endeavours. This is vital in times of complex social, political and spiritual change. As knowledge advances, in such areas as neuroscience, these can be allied to the rich heritage of pastoral traditions held in practical theology. There is the potential for a new dimension of theological reflection.
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 | 0.028 | 0.133 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".