MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1854717913 · doi:10.21225/d5cs3k

About Us: Expressing the Purpose of University Continuing Education in Canada

2007· article· en· W1854717913 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of University Continuing Education · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContinuing educationLifelong learningPublic relationsContinuing professional developmentWork (physics)Higher educationQuality (philosophy)SociologyProfessional developmentPolitical scienceMedical educationPedagogyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores claims made on websites of CAUCE members about the purpose of university continuing education. CAUCE members often claim a role in addressing the needs or goals of learners seeking professional development, personal enrichment, or the furthering of knowledge and skills. They claim to deliver programs and services that promote lifelong learning for adults, whether as individuals or as members of communities and organizations. These programs and services are characterized as enabling access to quality education in flexible and innovative ways. The work of continuing education is often presented as a means to link universities with communities and with external agencies. This article describes these public claims made by Canadian university continuing education units and endeavours to promote informed reflection and dialogue about the purpose of those units.

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.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.258
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