La dimension marginale de l’inclusion de la diversité ethnique à l’école : l’exemple de la Colombie-Britannique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En Colombie-Britannique, le respect de la diversité, des droits humains et de la justice sociale en fait les piliers de la politique officielle provinciale d’inclusion dans les écoles ( BC Ministry of Education 2005). Cet article traite de la comparaison entre deux contextes scolaires (le programme régulier en anglais et l’école francophone) qui se différencient par le choix de la langue d’enseignement, l’articulation des rapports entre majorité / minorités et l’enjeu identitaire, et par la manière d’y considérer l’inclusion de la diversité ethnique dans leurs pratiques pédagogiques. L’analyse comparée d’un échantillon de données résultant d’entrevues réalisées auprès d’enseignants des écoles secondaires de la région métropolitaine de Vancouver met en évidence leur conception de la diversité, les points de divergence et de convergence présents dans leurs discours sur la diversité ethnique et son inclusion en classe, de même que l’écart existant entre les politiques éducatives de multiculturalisme et d’inclusion, adoptées par la province (ibid.), et les pratiques pédagogiques mises en place à cet effet. In British Columbia, respect for diversity, human rights and social justice, are the pillars of the official provincial politics of inclusion in the schools (BC Ministry of Education 2005). This article is about the comparison between two school systems (the regular program in English and the francophone school) which are differentiated by the choice of the language of instruction, the relationship between majority/minorities and identity issues, and by the way in which they consider the inclusion of ethnic diversity in their pedagogical practices. The comparative analysis of a sample of data from interviews with teachers in secondary schools in the metropolitan region of Vancouver reveals their conception of diversity, the points of divergence and convergence which are present in their discourse on ethnic diversity and its inclusion in the classroom, as well as the gap which exists between the education politics of multiculturalism and inclusion, adopted by the province (ibid.), and the pedagogical practices put into place for this purpose.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".