USING TACIT ASSUMPTIONS TO PROMOTE HUMAN DIGNITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discussion about the meaning and intended results of education is a conversation that must be undertaken frequently by all stakeholders in the educational process. One of these conversation partners is the Catholic school system. As in the public school sector, the question of school mission is taking place among leaders in the parochial system. Within our current context of high stakes testing and school accountability, today’s Catholic school leaders are also working to provide a clear vision of education in their school mission and practice that relates to core beliefs about life and the human person. Although differing in many considerable ways, leaders from both public and separate school systems can delve deeper into the dialogue of educational mission by sharing what is valued within each system’s context, and by reflecting on the practices of the other. The purpose of this article is to invite those interested in the social mission of education to consider the perspective of Catholic education in order to continue discussion and debate about the role and meaning of education. Specifically, this paper will attempt to articulate how school administrators might use reflection on tacit assumptions as a means to promote human dignity within their school communities. In order to articulate the mission of Notre Dame College, Canadian educator Fr. Athol Murray wrote a poem entitled ―The Notre Dame Man. ‖ As founder and visionary of the school, Murray illustrated the mission by describing the person he desired to form through his college. In the conclusion to his poem, Murray (2008) described his graduates by stating that, Not only will they be better prepared to fulfil their duties as a citizen, they should make a better friend, a better husband, a better father, a better wife, because free people do.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".