MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402104805 · doi:10.55016/ojs/jet.v13i1.43780

A Question of Aims and Assumptions in Canadian Education

2018· article· en· W4402104805 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. A. Macivor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of educational thought. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePsychologyMathematics educationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article deals with the OECD Report of 1976 on Canadian education. It reviews issues concerned with the planning, aims, and assumptions of Canadian education. The article focuses on a critique, occurring in Appendix B of the OECD Report, that attacks the most fundamental assumptions of the Canadian public school system. The criticism charges that the Canadian school system is organized along the lines of an old-fashioned industrial enterprise with children treated as raw materials that are processed through grade 12 where the best go on for further academic processing in universities. The article concurs with the view of the OECD Report.

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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0260.068
Scholarly communication0.0250.016
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0070.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.391 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of educational thought.Same topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207