MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1571416659 · doi:10.32316/hse/rhe.v23i2.3532

The Appeal of Technical Education in Tough Times: A Comparison of the Toronto and Windsor Experiences, 1890–1930

2011· article· en· W1571416659 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Kathleen Yolande Sharman, Larry A. Glassford

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement Theory and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindsorThrivingContext (archaeology)Interpretation (philosophy)Perspective (graphical)AppealSociologyWork (physics)Political sciencePublic relationsSocial sciencePedagogyMedia studiesHistoryEngineeringLawVisual artsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the establishment of two pioneering technical schools in Ontario - the Toronto Technical School in the 1890s, and Windsor-Walkervile Technical School in the 1920's - in a comparative perspective. Though separated by geography and chronological era, there are significant similarities in their development, from idealistic schemes in the minds of a few visionaries to bricks-and-mortar reality as thriving stand-alone technical high schools. The analysis, while based on primary documents from the historical period, utilizes both the classical interpretation of Robert Stamp and the work of subsequent revisionists. An examination of evolving educational policy and changes in regional economic geography helps to situate this comparative institutional study in a broader interpretive perspective. The conclusion, that each school in its time was innovative, popular and respected, will provide valuable historical context for current debates about the appropriate role, if any, of technical schools in public education.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0280.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicManagement Theory and PracticeFrench-language works237,207