‘Reasonable accommodation’ in Québec: the limits of participation and dialogue
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the Bouchard-Taylor Commission, a 2007—8 government consultation that was established in Québec to study interculturalism, secularism and national identity, in response to what had become known as the ‘reasonable accommodation debates’ on the extent to which minority and immigrant cultural practices could be accommodated. The focus of this exploration is on two aspects of the Commission: the citizens’ forums that were a part of its deliberative process; and the ways in which it responded to the idea of crisis. Through an analysis of aspects of the Commission’s final report, the ways in which the Commission was structured and the media representations of the Commission, this article argues that, despite the spirit of equality and fairness to which the commissioners were committed and the praise it received from some members of immigrant and minority groups, the Commission ended up reinforcing the racialised hierarchies and exclusions that it wanted to redress.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it