Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the unresolved issue of whether the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to public universities in Canada. The author considers the Supreme Court’s judgment in McKinney v. University of Guelph in the context of more recent jurisprudence on the application of the Charter, as well as divergent lower court judgments concerning restrictions on student expression. He argues that public universities in Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario implement specific government policies and exercise statutory powers of a public nature, which should subject them constitutional scrutiny. He further demonstrates that the Charter’s application is reconcilable with institutional autonomy. By limiting constitutional review to the public decisions of universities and imposing the reasonableness standard, courts can protect Charter values without unduly intruding into operational activities. More fundamentally, the author argues that the continued treatment of universities as Charter-free zones is both indefensible as a matter of legal principle, and inconsistent with the preservation of academic freedom.
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 | 0.023 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".