Adapting a Research Tool for Teaching in a Post-Pandemic World: Textual Communities and Critical Digital Pedagogy in the Context of a Comprehensive Liberal Arts Research University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the pedagogical adaptation of Textual Communities, a digital tool originally developed for collaborative research in textual scholarship, to teach paleography at the undergraduate level within a liberal arts context. Prompted by the exigencies of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic and the broader framework of critical digital pedagogy, the course-design reimagined the tool’s primary research-focused function — edition-making — as a dynamic teaching and learning environment emphasizing transcription, engagement, and student autonomy. The article presents a specific example of the use of a digital tool in teaching paleography, detailing its purpose and impact on student learning and engagement. The article offers a concrete case study of hybrid- and flexible-by-design pedagogy, showing the value of using scholarly digital tools in undergraduate settings.
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 | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".