MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914308960 · doi:10.3138/jcs.52.3.2017-0047.r1

The Life and Death of a Good Idea: Murray Ross’s Vision for the “New University”

2018· article· en· W2914308960 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
J. Paul Grayson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateLiberal arts educationThe artsPoliticsWorld War IIPolitical sciencePublic administrationHigher educationSociologyHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Ontario, in the 1960s, several new universities were founded; students flocked to post-secondary institutions in record numbers; and enrolment in arts and science programs reached the highest level since the end of the Second World War. Each of the new universities had its own mandate. As articulated by Murray Ross, its founding president, that of York University was to provide an interdisciplinary education that would contribute to students’ personal development, and understanding of the Canadian political system and world in which they lived. This article focuses on the first students to earn a York degree through Glendon College and the extent to which their university experiences and outcomes were consistent with the objectives identified by Ross. An examination of information collected on students at Glendon in the 1960s shows that by and large their reported experiences and outcomes were in keeping with Ross’s ideals; however, by the time they graduated, the mandate of the university and college had changed. While liberal arts continued to be important, the main mandate of the college became that of providing a bilingual education.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.023
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207