Bibliographic record
Abstract
RECENTLY found the following query posted to the Internet chatroom of the Math Central website hosted by the University of Regina: What is the future demand, in numbers, for a secondary mathematics teacher? The response read, Across North America, the demand for secondary mathematics teachers is higher than the number of people qualified and interested in teaching math. Certainly, in Ontario (where work) there is a shortage that will get worse for the next five years or more. am co-chairing a committee trying to come up with solutions. An hour later, found this submission to a site dedicated to encouraging teachers around the world to explore teaching in Canada: I am an experienced maths teacher having 8 yrs experience in India. can teach maths from 1 to +2 level having a qualification of M.Sc. B.Ed. and interested to work in a school abroad. Please contact. Three months after the entry was submitted, the follow-up read, No responses. If this vignette appeared as an item on the Ontario Grade-10 Literacy Test, students would be expected to make the link between problem and solution. One might expect even more literate policy makers, within and outside the realm of education, to be equally discerning. Canada has a demonstrable shortage of skilled workers and professionals that will become more acute as the work force ages. Canadians stubbornly refuse to replicate themselves by having more children. The country is at risk of finding itself short not only of physicians and math teachers but also of enough working-age, tax-paying citizens to support aging baby boomers in the style to which they have become accustomed. Phrased somewhat more elegantly, this argument is now offered alongside the more high-minded justifications for a national immigration policy that has brought more than 3.3 million and refugees to this country over the last 15 years.1 To be sure, every Canadian, with the exception of First Nations peoples, is an immigrant. There's even a well-known joke underlying the point: What's the definition of a Canadian? An immigrant with seniority. Past waves of immigration tended to draw from the United Kingdom, France, and, to a lesser extent, the northern European countries. Adventurers were eager to claim their share of the national dream, or so the story goes. The reality is a bit more harsh. Chinese nationals were recruited to build the national railroad; Italians, to work in the mines of northern Ontario; Ukrainians and Poles, to farm the inhospitable prairies. Yet, with the exception of Asian immigrants, who faced a head tax as the price of entry, policies of the past favored least identifiable as newcomers -- the ones most likely to look and act like the immigrants with seniority who were already here and already in charge. Several converging factors have transformed the face of this nation over the ensuing decades. The most significant influence has been the rise of the official story of this country as a grand experiment in multiculturalism. Especially during the 1990s, immigration policies became simultaneously more liberal in terms of numbers and more selective in their eligibility criteria. Fluency in either French or English became less essential, while employability, as predicted by postsecondary or professional qualifications, was given greater importance. The policies' architects believed that multiculturalism was most likely to succeed if newcomers could slide seamlessly into workplaces where they could contribute to the economy and raise children who would in turn embrace the pluralism of their new country. Once they had learned the language, of course. Dreams are good things, but they're hard to pin down. Hard to realize, too. Opponents of multiculturalism, whose numbers are either relatively small to begin with or constrained by political correctness (depending on one's perspective), see it as little more than a contrivance to ensure that Liberal governments are elected in perpetuity by grateful newcomers. …
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.190 | 0.112 |
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".