Integrating Young People of Different Religious and Ethnic Backgrounds in Our Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern societies, all around the world, are discovering that modernization, what we call progress and development, has not brought with it the harmonization and cultural homogenization that has long been predicted. The thesis used to be that modern social conditions like social differentiation, individualism, the break-up of earlier communities which superseded the social contexts of the past when religion flourished, would weaken the hold of religion and therefore free up adherents of various dogma, doctrines and supernatural allegiances to join the ranks of the information society. The electronic age, it was believed by some, with its emphasis on the industrial, the scientific-technological thrust of urban agglomerations would not provide propitious conditions for religious dominance and would lead to secular democratic societies. But, in order to build a common understanding of democracy that includes everyone, an understanding which fosters common political identity and mutual trust is essential. This goes beyond the tolerance that, so often, is simply a thin layer of behaviour pattern camouflaging deep seated reservations about people who aren't like 'us'.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".