MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W152655929

L'État, les familles et l'obligation scolaire au Nouveau-Brunswick dans les années 1940

2002· article· fr· W152655929 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jacques Paul Couturier, Wendy Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationPolitical scienceAllowance (engineering)LawSanctionsFamily economyTruancyAttendanceObligationFamily lawGovernment (linguistics)SociologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1941 the government of New Brunswick replaced various legislative measures regarding school attendance, the oldest of which dated back to 1906, by a new, tougher law. Although the law came into effect immediately, it produced few results. Not until the mid-1940s, after further revision and the introduction of the federal program of family allowances, did the law begin to have effect, and then not to the extent its promoters had hoped. The cause of compulsory school attendance took on a new dimension with the introduction of family allowances; in addition to the prohibitions and sanctions set out by school legislation, the superintendent could suspend payment of the allowance for a child who did not attend school. This prompted a type of dialogue between school authorities, mainly the superintendent, and parents regarding education of their children and the family situation. These exchanges show that childrens’ absence from school was in large part linked to the poverty of their families and to the need for children to participate in the family economy, a perspective not fully appreciated by school reformers in the 1940s.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207