Lifelong Learning and Continuing Education as a Complex and Interdisciplinary Framework for the 21st Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adult education movement was able to define its aims thanks to the discussion work in the field of some international conferences promoted by UNESCO in the second half of the twentieth century: starting with the Elseneur conference in 1949, then in Montreal in 1960 and in Tokyo in 1972, international meetings attended by up to seventy-nine states. The goal of adult education was essentially seen as the massive literacy of populations, as one of the fundamental areas of post-war reconstruction and the development of democracy. Already in the history of pedagogy, from humanism to the tenth ninth century, thanks above all to the work of some ‘enlightened’ pedagogists (Erasmus of Rotterdam, Comenius, Montaigne and Rousseau), and to educational movements of some philanthropic groups (Don Giovanni Bosco, Fourier and others), the sensitivity to the subject was forged above all as a work of a humanitarian approach and care for the opportunities for liberation of the peasant and proletarian population.
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 | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.057 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| 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".