MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945565111 · doi:10.32316/hse-rhe.v31i1.4659

Bringing Education to the Wilderness: Teachers and Schools in the Rural Communities of British Columbia, 1936–1945

2019· article· en· W2945565111 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Helen Raptis

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceConsolidation (business)WildernessLibrary scienceHumanitiesSociologyEthnologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior to the consolidation of British Columbia’s rural districts into larger administrative units in 1946, teachers in country schools faced numerous challenges, including inadequate living quarters and school resources, loneliness, danger within the community, and isolation from other professionals. How did teachers manage these conditions on the eve of consolidation? What prompted some to remain teaching in remote schools whereas others fled the communities—and in some cases, the profession? To address these questions, I examined interviews with twenty-four teachers who taught in BC from 1936 to 1945. I concluded that there were multiple factors influencing teachers’ decisions to stay or go, including their willingness and ability to manage multi-level classes, to fundraise for resources, and to actively engage with community members and activities. Indeed, teachers who survived their experiences in rural schools embraced their roles as agents of the state bringing the perceived advantages of education to remote regions of the province. Résumé Avant le regroupement des districts ruraux de la Colombie-Britannique en de plus grandes unités administratives en 1946, les enseignantes dans les écoles de campagne étaient confrontées à de nombreux défis tels que des logements et des ressources scolaires inadéquats, la solitude, le danger au sein de la communauté et l’isolement par rapport aux autres professionnels. Comment les enseignantes ont-elles géré ces conditions à la veille du regroupement? Qu’est-ce qui a encouragé certaines enseignantes à rester dans des écoles éloignées alors que d’autres ont fui ces communautés, et même dans certains cas la profession? Pour répondre à ces questions, j’ai étudié des entretiens avec vingt-quatre enseignantes qui ont œuvré en Colombie-Britannique de 1936 à 1945. Je conclus que de nombreux facteurs ont influencé la décision des enseignantes de rester ou de partir, notamment leur volonté et leur capacité à gérer des classes à plusieurs niveaux, à collecter des fonds et à s’engager activement envers les membres et les activités de la communauté. En effet, les enseignantes qui ont survécu à leurs expériences dans les écoles rurales ont assumé leur rôle d’agents de l’État, apportant ainsi les avantages perçus de l’éducation aux régions éloignées de la province.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0270.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207