MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1547887799 · doi:10.14288/bcs.v0i2.594

The Teachers of British Columbia and Superannuation

2010· article· en· W1547887799 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diane McNay

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureWork (physics)SociologyManagementPolitical scienceLawEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The movement for teachers' pensions in British Columbia gained little momentum until well into this century, but the problem of the destitute teacher existed from the beginnings of education in the province. Teachers, in fact, were not always considered necessary and thus could not hope to be well cared for even when they were able to work. According to the regulations of the Hudson's Bay Company in 1836, the father of the family was to be encouraged to devote his leisure hours to the education of his children, and the first school in the province of British Columbia was not established until 1846, when Vancouver Island became a crown colony. At that it was only a boarding school supported by the Company mainly to serve the children of Company employees. In 1852 a day school was set up, but this also was a private venture. Between 1853 and 1855 the Legislative Council built schools at Victoria, Craigflower, and Nanaimo, but all remained under the supervision of the chaplain of the Hudson's Bay Company. The first free common school was opened in 1865 at Esquimalt. The Common School Act was passed that year by the Legislative Assembly of

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0450.011
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Collections→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→