MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756347562 · doi:10.31468/cjsdwr.48

Writing at the Centre: A Sketch of the Canadian History

2016· article· en· W2756347562 on OpenAlex
Janet Giltrow

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse and Writing/Rédactologie · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsTimelineSketchHistoryWork (physics)Visual artsSociologyEngineeringArtComputer scienceMechanical engineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This contribution to our national discussion on writing studies and writing centres takes the long view, seeing recent events—reorganisations, reclassifications—as a chapter in the history of writing centres in Canada. It is a long view, but neither as long nor as broad as it could be, for it is tethered to my own career in writing studies: this is what I have seen, from institutional positions I have occupied, and from scholarly positions I have taken. I hope others will extend this slender timeline with further episodes and comment, and with corrections, challenge, and inquiry. I offer some preliminary analyses of the forces and trends at work in the history—and future—of writing centres in Canada, hoping others with bring further and deeper analyses to the story.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.197 · 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