Future Goals for Ontario Colleges and Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper has now been completed and is attached for your perusal. It addresses issues such as the balance between student, private sector, and provincial government shares of postsecondary funding, accessibility, program rationalization, and co-operation among the public educational institutions. Although we have reason to be proud of our postsecondary educational institutions and their performance over the years, we must recognize that changes will have to be made if they are to continue to meet the educational needs of the province. The accelerated rate of technological change occurring throughout the world makes this a time of radical alteration and restructuring in business and industry. This is creating a critical need for knowledge and skills that differ from those required in the past. What's more, the employment scene will be far from stable; the average individual will change careers a number of times throughout his or her life. These changes, along with others outlined in the paper, present a number of challenges that require us to review and update the policy framework we now use to guide postsecondary education decisions. The government is committed to public support of the postsecondary sector and to finding solutions and strategies that are both cost-effective and responsive to student needs. I have asked the panel that will co-ordinate this discussion to give me advice, once they have assessed all comments and proposals, on what government policy we should adopt to arrive at a system that will achieve our five objectives: excellence, accessibility, a range of programs and institutions that meets our needs, accountability, and responsiveness. Specifically, panel members have been asked to: 1. recommend the most appropriate sharing of costs among students...
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.011 |
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".