MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

La Escuela Pública en el Canadá de Habla Ingelesa: de Tratamiento de la Diferencia en el Contexto de la Globalización Económica

2008· article· en· W2010322665 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rosa Bruno‐Jofré, Dick Henley

Bibliographic record

VenueEncounters in Theory and History of Education · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Policies
Canadian institutionsBrandon UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolityDemocracySociologyCitizenshipIdeologyNationalismMulticulturalismPower (physics)GlobalizationPolitical scienceLawPedagogyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our understanding of Canadian polity formation is based on a pluralistic moral democracy that recognizes a fluid concept of cultural retention, differentiated citizenship as explained by Kymlicka, and a social ethic of care. We argue that multicultural education has not addressed issues concerning the national question with respect to Aboriginal nationalist and Quebec demands or has done so only in a fragmentary manner. Anti-racist education has developed a refreshing oppositional approach that deals with structures sustaining racism, sexism, and power issues. However, we contend that the dominance of globalization as an economic ideology and concomitant educational changes have generated conditions to deal with difference in terms of a democracy that has great faith in the power of the free market and lacks confidence in the possibility of conscious collective efforts to build a apace to define and redefine a public good. There is no doubt that the economic agenda is influencing citizenship formation in our schools even as teachers and students mediate those influences. Relevant to the understanding of the building of a Canadian polity is the clarification of the concept of democracy in light of the market imperative which has permeated language and the construction of meanings.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.363 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncounters in Theory and History of EducationSame topicEducational Practices and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207