Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interdisciplinary Canadian Studies emerged in two distinct phases. The first was launched with the birth of the Instititute of Canadian Studies at Carleton University in 1957, and provided a bridge from the age of the metanarrative and the canon to phase two, originating with the first issue of the Journal of Canadian Studies in 1966, and encountering the discourses of the postmodern and the post-colonial. As we begin the new millennium the second phase is beginning to give way to a third. This paper investigates phase two, particularly the interval 1966 to 1975. During these years the idea of diversity was institutionalized as a resistance to the meta narrative. The period is characterized by the liberation of a multiplicity of voices. Throughout its brief life, interdisiciplinary Canadian Studies has consistently favoured the collaboration of the disciplines in a spirit of widening intellectual boundaries. In phase two it proved to be uncomfortable with the fragmentation of imported critical theory, in its very nature conflicted by an intellectual commitment to the nation state and to notions of community and citizenship. Throughout phase two there has been a tension between interdisciplinarity and theory. Phase three might, it is suggested be characterized by a renewed collaboration of the disciplines, and a conversation of the voices, in defence of the relationship that makes them possible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".