MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464667904 · doi:10.7202/1070462ar

Catholic Schooling and the Permeation Trap: A Response to McDonough

2020· article· en· W2464667904 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David P. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Inquiry in Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Education and Schools
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrap (plumbing)PermeationSociologyPolitical scienceChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Religious education is, to a certain degree, about boundaries. The extent to which these boundaries are defined, or, to use a less charitable term, policed, is one of the fundamental questions of religious education in Canada today. With several provinces still offering fully publicly-funded religious schools (Catholic separate schools, most notably), and with the range of religious charter school options increasing, the idea of religious school identity has become ever more pertinent. Because Catholic separate schools receive extraordinary public support, the question of Catholic identity in education is a strangely public question. What is Catholic about Catholic schools, and why should they be separated from public schools? It is rare for public discourse to reach so far into discussions of one particular group's religious identity.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.387
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Inquiry in EducationSame topicReligious Education and SchoolsFrench-language works237,207