Precarious Creativity and the [Im]possibility of the Radically Collegial Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sanson and Curtin (2016) describe the modern worker as needing to “ready themselves for iterative change and persistent contingency as standard employment and its associated entitlements become artefacts of a bygone industrial era” (p. 11). An “associated entitlement” in this digital era is the support of a collegial community. This chapter looks at the [im]possibility of finding collegial care in the liminal space of iterative change that defines the world of both art making and adjunct teaching in higher education. Inspired by the Bourdieusian concept of illusio, the author looks at how “precarious livelihoods are indicative of a new world order of social and economic instability” (Curtin & Sanson, 2016, p. 11) and asks if a deconstruction and rebuilding of collegial language can help to ground the creation of community within that new world. Using a short independent film as a case study, the author seeks an expanded collegium that is supported by a vocabulary set inspired by the film that can scaffold an itinerant creative educator's experience of community and support.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".