The Evolution of Governance at the Toronto School of Theology, 1969–2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Toronto School of Theology (TST), which is the name used for both a consortium of seven colleges founded in 1969 and a not-for-profit corporation established a year later, designed a governance for itself in 1970 that promoted the co-operation of the member institutions while safeguarding their autonomy. The TST’s bylaw—which entrenched conflicts of interest, confused corporation with consortium, loaded councils with both governance and administrative functions, assigned similar functions to different groups, and obscured lines of accountability—helped preserve the member colleges from unwelcome changes. Subsequently, however, two significant moments brought modifications to TST’s governance that may have been unavoidable but that subverted the consortium’s original controlling vision. These moments were TST’s first Memorandum of Agreement with the University of Toronto in 1979 and the university’s imposition of its new quality assurance regime in 2011. TST is now frequently caught between two masters: the member colleges that own it and the university that treats it, in many respects, as one of its academic units.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".