MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518502755 · doi:10.7202/018088ar

Regards croisés sur l’inclusion des minorités en contexte scolaire francophone minoritaire au Canada

2008· article· fr· W1518502755 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Diane Gérin‐Lajoie, Marianne Jacquet

Bibliographic record

VenueÉducation et francophonie · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrenchHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article pose un regard critique sur la façon dont les écoles de langue française de l’Ontario et de la Colombie-Britannique favorisent l’inclusion de la population scolaire immigrante au sein de la salle de classe. Adoptant une perspective critique de la notion de diversité, les auteures s’interrogent sur la manière dont l’école compose avec une population scolaire de plus en plus diversifiée sur les plans racial, culturel et linguistique. En examinant plus particulièrement la situation dans les écoles de langue française situées en milieu francophone minoritaire, les auteures mettent en lumière les difficultés que pose l’implantation en milieu francophone minoritaire de directives et politiques de gestion de la diversité élaborées suivant une perspective de majoritaire. De plus, la prédominance de l’éducation multiculturelle, axée sur la célébration des différences, laisse peu de place à une approche plus critique qui permettrait de questionner le statu quo et d’engager une réflexion sur la manière de concevoir et d’actualiser l’inclusion des minorités. À cet égard, une réflexion de fond s’impose sur la problématique de la diversité en milieu scolaire francophone minoritaire.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0270.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉducation et francophonieSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207