MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1571104519 · doi:10.32316/hse/rhe.v24i2.4298

R.D. Gidney and W.P.J. Millar, How Schools Worked: Public Education in English Canada, 1900-1940

2012· article· en· W1571104519 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Thomas Fleming

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPolitical scienceSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

regarded as two of the nation's preeminent historians of education, have set themselves a difficult but worthy task -reconstructing the real world of public schools in English-speaking Canada from the end of the nineteenth century to the middle of the twentieth century.In explaining their purpose, they write: "To those who have tended to dismiss the early twentieth-century school as the home of mindless rote, drill, and irrelevance, or, under the spell of a romanticized afterglow, cast it as a model of focused purpose, high academic standards, public accountability for achievement, and communal solidarity, we want to invite contemplation of more tempered and nuanced assessments" (xix).With this in mind, they build a finely textured portrait of an eventful historical era that employs a careful sampling of experiences to illustrate that Canada's educational story in Englishspeaking provinces was remarkably similar in its expression from the Maritimes to the Pacific between 1900 and 1940.Drawing on an impressive collection of archival documents, interwoven with an arsenal of past and recent historical studies, the authors probe a series of questions across thirteen chapters that explore the broad contents of schooling, including: patterns of attendance; the character of schools as organizations; the characteristics, qualifications, and gender of the teaching workforce; the burdens and inequities of school finance; the organization of instruction; the measurement of educational progress; levels of participation in secondary education; and, how matters of educational quality were determined.Altogether, the study is nothing less than a tour de force that takes us on a journey into the inner linings of school organizations and inside the process of schooling itself from the ground up.From an array of rich statistical descriptions we learn, for example: "How many

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)0.004
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207