Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robert Edwards Holloway and the interesting period of his tenure at the Methodist College in St John's, Newfoundland, first came into my life as an oasis in what was proving to be a barren desert in my explorations of the history of science education in Newfoundland.The explorations were a prelude to my completing my doctoral studies at Boston University and were designed to help me to understand current problems in science education in the schools by examining their historical origins.I had looked, first of all, at the history of education in Newfoundland in relation to social and cultural development and, against this background, examined what was happening in science in the small outport schools of the nineteenth century; the private schools that were springing up in the larger towns for the growing middle class; the grammar schools, convent schools and government or board schools; and, finally, the academies that were established in St John's to provide a measure of higher education as the population increased.The discovery that science was largely lacking in the curriculum of the schools of nineteenth-century Newfoundland was not surprising.Science had not yet found its way into the curriculum of most British schools, and in Newfoundland teachers had not been required to include science in their training.The three denominational academies of the mid-nineteenth century in St John's, later to be called "colleges," provided a higher level of education than was available elsewhere.Here, there would be occasionally rich periods of science education; but all three were, at first, like the grammar schools, largely classical in emphasis.Suddenly, in 1874, as the principal of the Wesleyan Academy in St John's, there was this young schoolmaster from England, fresh from a University of London degree, with two years as
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 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.259 | 0.179 |
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".