The Subjective Necessity of Nonviolence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HILE IT'S THE FIRST TIME JEFF TURNER-my partner for almost thirty years-has been in this room, it's not my first time.I've been here before, many times, and over several decades.You see, I started-but could not have brought off without the invaluable assistance of my co-director Janet Miller-the JCT-associated conferences (JCT a journal I also started but could not have brought off without Janet Miller, who served as Managing Editor).The first of these meetings was held at the Airlie House in Warrenton, Virginia, that location thanks to University of Virginia Professor Charles W. Beegle, a student of Paul Klohr, as is Janet Miller and Tom Poetter's mentor at Indiana University, Norm Overly.The year was 1978.Bill Schubert might have been there.James B. Macdonald was.At those first meetings, our conference wasn't large enough to occupy the entire place; maybe our second year there we learned that we were sharing the place with the CIA, a fact that prompted us to move the meeting.I think it was through University of Dayton Professor Joseph Watras that Paul Klohr learned of the Bergamo Center, as you know associated with the Catholic Church, not the CIA but another institution not all progressive people appreciate.Paul and I drove here in 1981-I was still teaching at the University of Rochester, where I'd met Janet Miller-and we decided it will do.The first conference was held here in 1982, the name JCT conference soon replaced by the Bergamo Conference (informally only, as the conference site director discouraged us from officially adopting the name).Tonight, here, in this room where I've been so many times before, I am responding to the call of nonviolence, a call Hongyu Wang heard first and resounded to the rest of us in curriculum studies.What I'm presenting tonight is a course of study juxtaposing-a term Janet Miller brought to my attention, one also developed by Teresa Strong-Wilson-a series of fragments, a term Tom Poetter (2025) employs in his moving new book titled Curriculum Fragments.A literaryphilosophical term, fragment is also a scientific, specifically geological term, as geologists reconstruct the past by "using mere fragments to tell a larger story" (Schulz, 2024).If you'd like a glimpse into Tom's curriculum fragments-before asking your university library to purchase a copy-go to www.curriculumstudies.ca-scrolldown the table of contents on the left, click on our YouTube channel, and there-among other offerings-you'll find the book launches I've hosted, among them Tom's, but also others, including the launch of James Burns' (2023) important new book-Curriculum and the Problem of Violence: Biopolitics, Truth, History and Fascism-and W
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".