MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563388697 · doi:10.29173/css231

How should citizenship be integrated into high school history programs? Public controversies and the Québec History and Citizenship Education curriculum: an analysis

2012· article· en· W2563388697 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Marc–André Éthier, David Lefrançois

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Social Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionCitizenshipBattleSpectacleSocial studiesCentralityAppealColonialismSociologyMedia studiesCurriculumEvent (particle physics)PatriotismPolitical scienceSocial scienceHistoryPedagogyLawArt historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 30 July to 2 August, 2009, over 2,000 North American tourists had prepared to go to Quebec City to re-enact an episode of the Seven Years War: the battle of the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City, where two European colonial powers had clashed on 13 September, 1759. As is usual for this type of lay gathering, everything that has fascinated 20 century history scholars was excluded from the planned spectacle, such as issues of family, material culture, and the social structures of the people involved. Such an event illustrates the interest a number of people have, worldwide, in a particular approach to the past, based on what Barton and Levstik (2004) call the exhibition stance. According to Rosenzweig and Thelen (1998), Letourneau (2008), and Conrad, Letourneau and Northrup (2009), such activities are widespread, and might illustrate the centrality of the past for the re-enactors’ identities. This particular event especially encapsulates the popular appeal of this kind of relation to the past, inasmuch as the reenactors devote considerable time to learning their re-enactment roles and spend significant financial resources to buy the accessories they need.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Social StudiesSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207