Citizenship in Name Only: Constructing Meaningful Citizenship through a Recalibration of the Values Attached to Waged Labor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In November 2010 the Toronto Star reported that the newly revamped Canadian citizenship test had led to an unusually high failure rate. Using the generally, although not universally, accepted understanding of citizenship as a set of civil, political and social rights and responsibilities the more meaningful test is how, or whether, we can exercise our citizenship. Closer examination reveals a deeply rooted connection between the ability to exercise social citizenship and participation in waged labor. Denied access to waged labor, as people with disabilities systematically are, undermines a person’s identity as an active citizen and his or her ability to exercise social citizenship. A recalibration of the values associated with waged labor namely, independence, self-reliance and productivity would extend worth and identity to those systemically deprived of both, produce allies amongst historically disadvantaged groups, and benefit broader segments of society many of who grow disenchanted with the current distribution of wealth and power. Key Words: waged labor, productivity, independence, social citizenship, meaningful citizenship
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".