MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987257161 · doi:10.22230/src.2019v10n2a305

The Canadian Journal of Higher Education/La Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur

2019· article· en· W2987257161 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Michelle Pidgeon, Ashley Pullman, Walter Archer, Amélie Groleau

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarly and Research Communication · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of OttawaUniversity of AlbertaSimon Fraser University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsScholarshipPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)Higher educationHumanitiesLibrary scienceArtHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Journal of Higher Education (CJHE) has been the sole journal for higher education scholarship in Canada for over 40 years, and is the primary source of commentary on trends and relevant research in the Canadian postsecondary context. Since its inauguration in 1971, the CJHE has promoted both English- and French- language higher education research, and the shi from a print to open access journal in 2009 further promoted the accessibility of this scholarship. Along with documenting the success and growth of the CJHE, this article highlights ongoing production challenges and the need to support greater diversity in regard to language, themes, and authorship. It concludes by presenting a vision plan for the future – an articulation of hopes for the field of higher education in Canada. RésuméLa Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur (RCES) est l’unique revue savante dans le domaine de l’enseignement supérieur canadien depuis plus de 40 ans en plus d’être la principale source analyse de tendances et de recherches pertinentes dans le contexte postsecondaire canadien. Depuis son inauguration en 1971, la Revue s’est employée à promouvoir la recherche sur l’éducation supérieure en langue anglaise et française, et le passage en 2009 d’une publication papier à une publication en libre accès a contribué encore davantage à l’accessibilité de ce domaine de connaissances. En plus de documenter le succès et l’essor de la Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur, nous soulignons les défis de production actuels ainsi que la nécessité de soutenir une plus grande diversité en ce qui a trait à la langue de publication, aux thèmes des articles et aux auteurs potentiels. Nous concluons en présentant la notre plan d’avenir qui articule nos espoirs concernant le champ de l’enseignement supérieur au Canada.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0130.014
Scholarly communication0.0250.005
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.020

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarly and Research CommunicationSame topicDoctoral Education Challenges and SolutionsFrench-language works237,207