Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thesis deals with the global phenomenon of free education as a radical alternative to the present mainstream educational system. The author's goal is to describe phenomenon of free education and to find out to what extent this Sudbury educational model is viable, realizable and requested in other environment (incl. CR) and what results it brings, on the base of a content analysis of domestic, but particularly foreign sources and by means of an analysis of media reports and questioning from the background of the American Sudbury Valley School. The thesis is opened by an explanation of the necessity to change the educational paradigm to make it reflect the reality of the 21st century, and by mutual specification of the terms traditional and free education. Further chapters introduce the concept of free education; a substantial part of the thesis then provides a detailed insight into the operation and normal life of the Sudbury Valley School, including the results of its graduates in further education and in practical life. In the last chapter the author summarizes the research results and concludes that free education in democratic schools is, despite criticism and scepticism of a part of the public, an interesting, feasible and viable (not in the CR yet because of legislation barriers) alternative to the...
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".