MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346115836

Teaching 'Public Interest Vocationalism': Law as a Case Study

2015· article· en· W2346115836 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Devlin, Jocelyn Downie

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Law and Ethics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic interestPolitical scienceLegal educationLawMathematics educationSociologyPedagogyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this short essay, we present law as a case study of teaching professionalism in the public interest. Our hope is that the accountancy profession, as well as other professions (including law), will be prompted to reflect on the potential for the concept of public-interest vocationalism to at least inform, if not transform, education in their domains. The argument proceeds in three stages. In Part I, we set the context by identifying a number of profound challenges now facing Canadian legal education. In Part II, we introduce the concept of, and provide a justification for, public-interest vocationalism. In Part III, we provide a model of how legal education could be reformed in order to reflect, accommodate, and engender public-interest vocationalism.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicBusiness Law and EthicsFrench-language works237,207