Bibliographic record
Abstract
The national focus of Teaching Creative Writing in Canada follows editor Darryl Whetter’s recent continental approach in Teaching Creative Writing in Asia (Routledge, 2022). Several factors make Canada a uniquely relevant vantage for the study of contemporary Creative Writing pedagogy. Our doubly colonial (English/French) history remains manifest in Canada’s rare official bilingualism. Our recurring legal ties to the United Kingdom make us both culturally and physically a midpoint between the two major Anglophone influences on CW pedagogy, the UK and the USA, while also comparing us to the vibrant CW landscape of Australia (a fellow postcolonial country also reckoning with its displaced Indigenous culture). The number of Canadian CW master’s programs doubled in the 2000s, though Canadian postgraduate CW study divides between MFA degrees and hybrid MAs in English and Creative Writing. CW profs from all but one of Canada’s major CW programs, and from coast to coast, address the contemporary rethink of the Iowa workshop model, the climate-crisis, curriculum design, program management, prize culture, grants, interdisciplinarity (e.g., with visual art but also science) as well as crossovers with athletic training and coaching. Chapters conclude with field-tested writing advice from many of Canada’s most influential professors of fiction, poetry, creative nonfiction and drama.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.360 | 0.032 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".