Peace Education in Canada: Teacher Perceptions of the Cultivating Peace Education Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many Muslims, Arabs, and other minority communities in Canada experienced the backlash of the September 11, 2001 events. Although these groups were discriminated against in a number of institutions, Muslim children in secondary schools in particular experienced different types of discrimination and violence. In order to help reduce incidents of discrimination in schools, with the help of academics at the Ontario Institute for Studies of Education (OISE), the Classroom Connections (non-for profit organization) developed a peace education program, the Cultivating Peace. Using qualitative methods, this paper examines the perceptions of teachers who used the Cultivating Peace program. Four themes emerged from the data collected for this research: flexibility, utility, relevance, and challenges. The findings reveal that educators believe the Cultivating Peace program promotes a culture of peace in Canada. Teachers find the Cultivating Peace flexible in that it fits well in the curriculum. In particular, teachers believe the program fits well in a social science and humanities curriculum. In addition, educators perceive the program is useful in teaching conflict resolution, communication, and problem-solving skills. They also find that the Cultivating Peace program is relevant to students’ lives because it teaches values that promote a culture of peace. Teachers mentioned two major challenges: lack of time and distribution problems.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".