Bridge over troubled waters: policy development for Canadian music in higher education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian music composed in the Western European tradition does not have a high profile in Canadian education. Composers, music educators and media representatives, councillors of the Canadian Music Centre (CMC), collaborated with the author of this article to develop policies that would promote Canadian music content in post-secondary music and education institutions by employing a multiple measures methodology called Integrated Inquiry. Data from a Canadian music questionnaire, commentaries on the results by university representatives, and a visioning exercise by councillors was integrated to formulate policy recommendations. Participating universities recommended that the CMC circulate Canadian music catalogues and guide lists to university libraries, develop program partnerships among universities, foundations and professional arts organizations, promote and disseminate research on Canadian music, recognize student achievement in Canadian music research and performance, and develop guidelines for implementing Canadian music content in post-secondary music and education programs. Councillors advocated that post-secondary institutions ensure the inclusion of Canadian music content in recitals and performances, in theory, history, composition and music certification courses, in juries for admitting and evaluating students and offering scholarships, in practice-teaching and in library holdings. Furthermore, visiting artists and university staff should be encouraged to include Canadian music within their personal repertoire and libraries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it