Bibliographic record
Abstract
THE "GREAT TRANSITION"alf a century ago, legal education in Manitoba followed the trend in Canada.Its aim shifted: from a focus on training practising professionals toward higher education.It moved from downtown Winnipeg to the University of Manitoba; from the precincts of the courts and law firms, to the corner of a sprawling suburban campus.Law societies in Manitoba and other provinces would become responsible for completing the preparation of lawyers, including any articling requirements or admission examinations.We might call this change-in location, organization, mission-across Canada and this province the "Great Transition."Are we on the cusp of a counter-reformation-call it the "Second Transition"?While remaining part of the University, will this law schooland many others in Canada-aim to provide much more practice-ready students?That might mean much more clinical and experiential learning programs, or even a pervasive attention to the realities of practice, with almost every class spending some time on practical exercises.It could include administering much of the instruction, examination, and certification currently carried out by the bar admission course.Just a few months ago, one of our students of this school published an op-ed piece arguing that we outright move back downtown.1 The prospect of this counter-reformation was my inspiration for proposing this special issue of the Manitoba Law Journal.We have interviewed many of the principal figures from the era of the Great 1 Ben Wickstrom, "Downtown Bay fertile ground for law school", Winnipeg Free Press (6 June, 2016), online:
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".