MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4385519703 · doi:10.32316/hse-rhe.vi0.5155

Margaret A. Nash and Karen L. Graves, Mad River, Marjorie Rowland, and the Quest for LGBTQ Teachers' Rights

2023· article· en· W4385519703 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cris Mayo

Notice bibliographique

RevueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAcademic Freedom and Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGay rightsSociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This wonderfully complex book, Mad River, Marjorie Rowland, and the Quest for LGBTQ Teachers' Rights, examines the ripple effects of Marjorie Rowland's attempt to gain recognition for the discrimination she faced as a bisexual teacher in 1974.Nash and Graves wind together Rowland's personal experiences with the burgeoning legal theories that initiated LGBTQ-related employment equity claims and provide intricate analysis of the multiple ways that such claims have been refused, sidestepped, and otherwise resisted by courts and employers, even when legislative progress has been seemingly made.This apparently ever-timely examination of the challenges facing recognition of LGBTQ rights is an important reminder that progress all too often is not linear.Further, the authors remind us that anti-LGBTQ backlash is also all too often directed at education and educators (and students as well).As Nash and Graves point out, while gay rights began to make progress in the 1970s, conservatives focused their energies on removing gay and lesbian teachers from schools.Graves' And They Were Wonderful Teachers provides an excellent account of teacher purges in Florida.Rowland undertook a series of court challenges when she was fired from her school counselling job for telling another employee she was bisexual and eventually tried appealing to the Supreme Court.When Supreme Court Justice William Brennan dissented from the court's determination to not hear Rowland's case, he pointed out the historical and contemporary discriminations facing gay people and the public concern of Rowland's words, two aspects of her case that the Supreme Court and other courts had denied.His dissent had an impact well beyond her case: it helped bolster LGBTQ-related employment discrimination cases that followed, including those of other educators as well as those serving in the military.Like Rowland's unsuccessful bid to have her freedom of speech protected as a bisexual woman, Brennan's dissent, while unable to directly help Rowland, went on to open the cracks in legal unwillingness to recognize LGBTQ people.Nash and Graves carefully note the shifts in legal strategy from early cases like Rowland's that relied on freedom of speech to the more recent trend of using due process and dignity.(The latter two strategies were recently called into question by Justice Thomas's concurrent decision in Dobbs.)While showing these theoretical complications, this book also shows how LGBTQ equality has been built and the sacrifices of those LGBTQ people, like Rowland, whose livelihoods and careers were upended but who kept going.Nash and Graves caution, too, that even if legal strategies work and laws are reformed to include LGBTQ people under non-discrimination policies, school administrators and districts find ways to fire LGBTQ educators using trumped up excuses.As local practices, policies and, in too many cases, state laws continue to obstruct LGBTQ rights, the lessons in this book are important reminders of the continuity of

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,511
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,070
Tête enseignante GPT0,356
Écart entre enseignants0,287 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationMême sujetAcademic Freedom and PoliticsTravaux en français237 207