MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1600603138 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v27i1.3336

Educating Adults for Citizenship: Critiquing Adequate Language Practices and Canada’s Citizenship Test

2014· article· en· W1600603138 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Casey Burkholder, Marianne Filion

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizenshipImmigrationTest (biology)LiteracyOrder (exchange)Political scienceLanguage policySociologyLawPedagogyPoliticsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2012, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) implemented a requirement that all aspiring Canadians who wish to take the Citizenship Test must have an adequate level of English or French language skills, defined as Canadian Language Benchmark (CLB) 4. The CLB 4 language policy directly and, we argue, problematically links language abilities with the right to citizenship for new immigrants, and relatedly, assumes a deficit conception of literacy. We examine the discourses embedded within the citizenship study guide, Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship (2012), the new language requirement policy, and the CIC website in order to expose how these place problematic restrictions on new immigrants who aspire to become Canadian.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207