A MASTERCLASS IN ADULT EDUCATION: TECHNOLOGY AND SKILLS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The publications of the first quarter of the XXI century talk about the need for creativity, imagination, initiative of an adult. The article examines how masterclasses and festivals of masterclasses are used to develop the relevant qualities. The paper aims to clarify the content of these concepts. The authors used a technological approach to reveal the meaning of the concepts of ‘masterclass’ and ‘a festival of masterclasses.’ The study is based on the provisions of the theory of transformational learning. Master class is understood as a form of organization of adult learning, the essence of which is the learner's skill. According to the analysis result, the festival of masterclasses is characterized as one that relies more on the manufacturability of the learning process. There are two types of master classes: 1) the ones of technological level, which are designed to help in gaining new experience and in the organization of meaningful leisure for adults; 2) the ones of the skill development level, which through the self-development of the learner, invite to the self-development of the learner. Emphasis is placed on the expediency of creating conditions for synergies and self-organization of a team of leading master classes in festivals that understand the educational needs of target groups. It envisages publicity, the presence of an audience that observes the process of interaction between the presenter and the participants of the master class, as well as the festival as a set of masterclasses. It turns out that in this sense, masterclasses and festivals can meet the expectations of adults to learn not only as a form of learning a new experience and the organization of meaningful leisure but as a form of learning for change and transformation, the impetus to development and self-development. In this way, the paradigm of pedagogical creativity is realized.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".