A Novel Case for Publicly Funding Alberta’s Private Schools, 1953-1967
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between 1958 and 1967, neo-Calvinist immigrants resisted the assimilating pressure of Alberta’s liberal-inspired public school system by arguing that public funding should be extended to independent schools. This essay analyzes how neo-Calvinist ideas about the nature of society, the place of religion in public life, the purpose of schools, and the state’s task in regards to plurality directly challenged mainstream thinking on these issues. The essay argues that the neo-Calvinists believed their new idea of a pluriform public order created space for Albertans to imagine public policies that could escape the assimilating tendencies of mainstream liberalism. Entre 1958 et 1967, les immigrants néo-calvinistes ont résisté aux pressions assimilatrices du système libéral d’écoles publiques de l’Alberta en affirmant que les fonds publics devraient également financer les écoles indépendantes. Le présent article analyse com-ment les idées néo-calvinistes portant sur la nature de la société, la place de la religion dans la vie publique, la raison d’être des écoles et la tâche de l’état en matière de plural-ité ont directement influé sur la façon de penser du grand public sur ces sujets. L’article avance que les Néo-calvinistes croyaient que leur nouvelle idée d’un ordre public pluri-
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".