MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282958741 · doi:10.4000/erea.14343

John Clifford, Militant Evangelicals, and the Colonial Model for ‘Secular’ Schools (1870s-1920s)

2022· article· en· W4282958741 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Géraldine Vaughan

Bibliographic record

VenueE-rea · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilitantProtestantismEthosState (computer science)ColonialismSecular educationReligious studiesSociologyReligious educationPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the time of the enactment of compulsory primary education, the Baptist minister John Clifford, along with other Evangelical pressure groups, advocated for the enforcement of State-funded secular schooling. They defended a ‘secular’ education, i.e. a curriculum infused with a broad Protestant ethos, which should be bestowed upon all children throughout Britain and its empire. For Clifford and militant Evangelicals, British Dominions offered models of State secular schooling because of the effective separation of State and Church within their realms. This article explores the militant Evangelical views on ‘secular’ education, along with the fights waged against (Roman Catholic) denominational schooling. It explores the arguments that enthusiastic Evangelical imperialists brought forward to defend their vision of the ideal Briton – a Protestant citizen free from clerical influence. It also studies the Roman Catholics’ reactions to Evangelical attacks against their separate school system, and investigates the Manitoba School Issue as a test case confronting two opposing worldviews on education, the State, and the Churches.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-reaSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207