Influence of the university in Canada on the life of the student.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
it within a larger, secular university system.This latter has led to various efforts to fit the church college into the system, by federation or affiliation, none of them entirely successful.New techniques of co-operation are required, but so far they have not been discovered.Another complication in our system arises from the lack of strong graduate schools in Canada, hitherto so marked, but happily in process of being supplied.This means that American or English (or European) training has been necessary for advanced work.But they are in different traditions and therefore present a problem for university administration in the choice of staff.Universities in the newer, western provinces are still very close to frontier conditions.Educationally, this means a limited programme, students not so well prepared as those in older communities, and a more utilitarian view of education itself ; also, it should be added, a good deal of financial stringency.It is a hard struggle for such universities to maintain standards, and to keep up with the growth of university curricula.Administration of universities in Canada presents some problems to those concerned with the actual work of education.To begin with, excessive depend- ence on the provincial grant, in the absence of endowment, makes for political interference or the fear of it.Also, administrative control is largely separated from the teaching function.Important university bodies, boards of governors and the like, are often dominated by non-academic persons, business men and political figures.Thus misunderstandings easily arise, the teaching staff may feel it has not sufficient stake in the institution, and teachers become increasingly mere employees.All these factors help to bring about a condition in which there is the lack of any pervasive sense of unity or common purpose among the staff.No doubt
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.002 |
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".