MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991963979 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v29i2.4790

Public Servant Schools in Canada: A Concept for Reconciliation

2017· article· en· W2991963979 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Mark Weiler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersProductivity InstituteQueen's UniversityWilfrid Laurier UniversityMcGill University
KeywordsPublic administrationCommissionDeclarationPublic servantPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)IndigenousCurriculumPublic relationsSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada has called on federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments of Canada to educate public servants about the history and legacy of Indian residential schools and related topics, such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This article advances this call to action by conceptualizing “public servant schools” as government organizations that provide learning opportunities to public servants. The Canadian adult education literature, however, is largely silent on this topic, even though numerous examples can be found across branches and levels of governments within Canada. Drawing on material acquired through the Access to Information Act, this article breathes life into this topic by documenting the Canada School of Public Service and elements of its curriculum related to the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.907

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0530.084
Scholarly communication0.0260.012
Open science0.0050.016
Research integrity0.0090.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207