Sustaining Canadian Studies in the U.K.: Role Play as an Engaging Pedagogical Tool to Teach Canada Abroad
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While scholars have been successfully offering courses in Canadian Studies abroad for more than three decades, the recent cancellation of the Government of Canada’s funding program, Understanding Canada, puts such foreign-based teaching programs in a state of flux. Given that there is now little financial support for institutions, courses and conferences, instructors must ensure that courses in Canadian Studies are engaging and accessible in order for the discipline to stay relevant within this new fiscal reality. One solution could be to use innovative teaching techniques to demonstrate the value of Canadian Studies as an academic discipline. My experience at the Centre of Canadian Studies (the Centre), University of Edinburgh provides a case study for the use of this approach. In a first-year undergraduate course at the Centre, offered in 2009-10, I used role play to teach the arguments for and against the establishment of Canada wherein each student took on the guise of a specific delegate at the 1864 Charlottetown Conference and argued the case in an open debate. This exercise simultaneously allowed me to deliver the necessary content while also providing students with the opportunity to immerse themselves in the core arguments and characters. As a result, barriers to learning were reduced as content became more accessible and the interdisciplinary nature of Canadian Studies became more evident because each student approached the exercise from their own subject specialism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".