MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132966852

General education within Ontario's community colleges: second class citizens?

2004· dissertation· W7132966852 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jillian Esmonde Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2004
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Vocational educationIdentity (music)Class (philosophy)Value (mathematics)General educationMaterialismSymbolic interactionismQualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

General education occupies a unique position within the college system, in that the colleges are primarily concerned with the teaching of vocational skills, while General Education courses tend to be Liberal Arts-oriented. For this reason, many within the college community question the relevance of general education. Through a series of qualitative interviews, the researcher seeks to understand the relevance of these perceptions to the identity of the general education faculty. A thematic analysis utilizing symbolic interactionist theory reveals that general education faculty tend to identify with each other in their vision of general education. The faculty also tend to form strong identities with regards to the value of teaching and social activism. The researcher seeks to place these patterns into a materialist context, by exploring the relevance of budgetary restraint, full-time vs. non full-time status, and power. In conclusion, the researcher explores potential areas for future research in this area.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207