Anthony Di Mascio, The Idea of Popular Schooling in Upper Canada: Print Culture, Public Discourse, and the Demand for Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oppressive, top-down state that provoked a lot of good social history once upon a time has been replaced, in recent years, with a state that was constructed to a surprising degree from the bottom up.People demanded a whole range of services that the private sector couldn't provide, ranging from criminal justice to income support to schooling, and their demands for those state services often significantly outpaced what government officials were prepared to supply.People didn't always get the services on the terms that they wanted -and residential schools aimed at coercive assimilation of indigenous children provide the worst example of ironic outcomes -but they entered passionately and hopefully into the conversations about what could or should be public services.Amongst the excellent social history that the discovery of the demand-led state has been provoking is Anthony Di Mascio's new book on The Idea of Popular Schooling in Upper Canada: Print Culture, Public Discourse, and the Demand for Education.Di Mascio looks for and finds evidence of popular demand for common schools in Upper Canada that considerably pre-dated the legislation creating such schools.Private schools were expensive and their quality was erratic; only state intervention could bring cheap and decent schools to ordinary people across the province.Reformers and newspapermen took up the cry for popular schooling first, around the turn of the century.Conservative elites only began to respond to that demand in the second decade of the nineteenth century, after the War of 1812 convinced them of the need to cultivate a conservative and loyal identity amongst the people.To no small degree, Di Mascio argues, educational policy offered a rare possibility
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".