MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1538286978 · doi:10.1108/08198691111140785

The mythic campus and the professorial life

2011· article· en· W1538286978 on OpenAlexaffabout
E. Lisa Panayotidis, Paul Stortz

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory of Education Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityValue (mathematics)ScrutinyNarrativeSociologyIdentity (music)MythologySituatedAestheticsAnthropologyArtLawLiteraturePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose In 1937, a pictorial fine art map of the University of Toronto was designed and painted by artist Alexander Scott Carter. The map was commissioned by Vincent Massey, then High Commissioner for Canada in Britain, and given as a gift to Hart House. As a vibrantly visual rendition of the university's historical lineage, the map depicts the evolution of the university's various colleges along with its founders, contemporary geographical boundaries, and lush and verdant landscapes. The purpose of this paper is to inquire into its cultural and historical importance. Design/methodology/approach The paper analyses, and provides a viewpoint on, A. Scott Carter's map. Findings Carter's map reveals the discursive and visual interpretive frameworks in which the map was situated and the narratives and myths that it sanctioned. The map performs an important function in authorizing the collective identity of the university and its actual and imagined communities. It provides a cultural expression of shared values, ideals, and particular historical traditions. The university's place in the hierarchy and tradition of Canadian higher education in the British Commonwealth is embodied in the map at a time when such ideas were under scrutiny by professors and intellectuals who were arguing for the extrication of Canada from colonial inheritances. Originality/value Carter's map highlights the university and its integral cultural artifacts, spaces, and practices as being replete with contested meanings, experiences, and symbolism. Through dynamic cartography, new approaches in deciphering the official and informal campus emerge to produce a nuanced and multifaceted historical picture of university and academic cultures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.239 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistory of Education ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207