To Be North American but Not American: The Transformation of Canadian Studies and Canadian Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadianization movement emerged in the late 1960s and early 1970s from Canadian universities and has been treated as a brief moment in the historiography of Canada’s 1960s, post-secondary education in Canada and broader Americanization of Canadian society. The historical figureheads of the movement, Robin Mathews and James Steele, advocated for the hiring of Canadian faculty and increased Canadian content in universities across Canada. When a broader lens is used to view the Canadianization movement, it becomes apparent that the movement was the beginning of efforts to develop Canadian Studies as an interdisciplinary project in Canadian universities. Canadianizing efforts examined course content, curricula and personnel (including faculty, graduate students, and administrators) in order to foster a unique Canadian identity through the promotion of Canadian education. These studies were the origins of a number of Canadian university hiring policies and practices in place today. The Canadianization movement needs to be considered a broader movement–both chronologically and outside the involvement of Mathews and Steele–because, when it is expanded to encompass other organizations and reports that supported explicit Canadianization goals, such as the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), the Committee for an Independent Canada, the Symons’s Report, and David Cameron’s Taking Stock, the movement’s importance to Canadian education and Canadian identity becomes readily apparent.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.071 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".