Access to the educational institutions of communities whose language is fragile: a Canadian perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After examining certain elements in the debate regarding the control of access to the educational institutions of communities whose language is in a fragile situation, the author presents the contrasting choices made in this respect over the past forty years by the French-speaking minority in Canada depending on whether or not it has the status of regional majority, as well as some of the consequences. The Canadian experience illustrates two approaches, namely that of the protection of a fragile minority by limiting access to the educational institutions it controls to people who have a historical or special connection to the language which defines it, or the dynamic use of schooling in an objective to transform ethnolinguistic relationships. Both approaches have some relevance. However, the first is clearly defensive and should be limited to groups whose vulnerability – which is not historical yet nevertheless present – is still recognised. The second has many more advantages and testifies to a dynamic definition of belonging and culture, which guarantees significant future development.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it