MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218660735 · doi:10.1177/0829573515599983

Canadian Innovation

2015· article· en· W2218660735 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michelle Drefs, Meadow Schroeder, Bryan Hiebert, E. Lisa Panayotidis, Katherine Winters, Jamie E. Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PsychologyGraduate studentsProfessional psychologyEngineering ethicsSchool psychologyPublic relationsPedagogyMedical educationPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a brief historical review and survey of the current landscape of online graduate psychology programs within the Canadian context. Specific focus is given to outlining the establishment and evolution of the first Canadian online professional specialization program in school psychology. The article argues that given the virtual absence of online graduate school psychology programs until recently, there have been limited opportunities to critically examine such approaches to teaching professional psychology. With the establishment in 2007 of the University of Calgary’s online graduate school psychology program, among the first in the world, a critically significant analysis is now possible. The purpose of this article is to document both the history of the program and to highlight the possible significance of this event to the profession. The article is intended to foster much-needed discussion at the national level concerning the future development and implementation of online graduate programs.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4170.124

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207