MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278742837

THE 1990 KIRPAN CASE: CULTURAL CONFLICT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF EQUITY POLICY IN THE PEEL DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

2011· dissertation· en· W2278742837 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNew Zealand Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquity (law)School districtPolitical sciencePublic administrationSociologyPedagogyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1990, a case came before the Ontario Human Rights Commission involving the collision of a religious rights policy enshrined in the Ontario Human Rights Code 1981 and a Peel Board of Education disciplinary policy prohibiting weapons including the kirpan, a dagger-like article of religious faith worn by baptized Sikhs. Harbhajan Singh Pandori claimed infringement of his religious rights as a Sikh under the Code. In a joint complaint, the Ontario Human Rights Commission alleged the Code had been violated in a Peel Board policy restricting the religious rights of Sikhs by prohibiting the kirpan. Attempts to mediate between complainant Sikhs and the Peel Board failed. The dispute went before an Ontario Human Rights Commission tribunal adjudicated by Rabbi W. Gunther Plaut who ruled that the kirpan was a religious symbol and could be worn to school subject to restrictions. The Pandori kirpan case illustrates the complexity of resolving issues of cultural and religious conflict in public institutions undergoing demographic change. Significant to the kirpan case were Canadian immigration policy changes which eliminated race and ethnicity from admission criteria. As a result, the Region of Peel witnessed significant intake of immigrants including Sikhs, some of whom insisted on their right to wear a kirpan. The extensive public debate that followed afforded valuable insight on the political process of policy-making in education and accommodating diversity in public educational institutions. The debate also set the stage for the development of the Peel Board’s equity policy documents--Manifesting Encouraging and Respectful Environments and The Future We Want launched in 2000. Despite the new equity documents, some observers have remarked that institutional change is slow unless pressure is applied by the courts or the Ontario Human Rights Commission. While the kirpan issue has been put to rest in Canada, issues of competing rights continue to challenge Canadians. The kirpan case demonstrates that balancing competing rights in a multicultural society is an ongoing struggle with no final resolution. In the twenty-first century, as Canada continues to diversify, debates concerning accommodation continue to be reflected in the public schools.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicNew Zealand Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207