A critical reading of The National Youth White Paper on Global Citizenship: What are youth saying and what is missing?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the recent National Youth White Paper on Global Citizenship (2015), a selection of Canadian youth identified their vision for global citizenship education (GCE). The document articulates the Canadian youths' vision for global citizenship and outlines changes that need to be implemented in order for that vision to be achieved. Drawing on critiques of modernity and of liberal multiculturalism coming from postcolonial, decolonial, and feminist anti-racist scholarship, this article explores how young people imagine their positionalities as Canadian citizens and agents of change in the world. We aim to describe how the White Paper can be used both as a call for deepening critical engagements in education as well as a bridge for discussions of GCE in ways that move conversations into new realms. This paper is divided into four sections. In the first section, we analyse the 2015 White Paper, written collaboratively by Canadian students. It is the first document to focus exclusively on youth perceptions of what action is needed and what problems need to be addressed. We summarize the Canadian youths' articulation and understanding of GCE and identify the major themes addressed. The second section articulates the calls for action that the Canadian youth deem necessary for their vision of global citizenship. As they demand an emphasis on criticality in their formal education, we consider how we can listen to and respond to these calls. The third section presents a critical analysis of the document with a view to paving the way for collaborations to push discussions even further. The fourth section highlights how we can build on the White Paper to move discussions about GCE in new and different directions. We aim to address how the White Paper can be used to further the conversations in ways that explore how the youths' calls for actions can open up the possibilities for critical GCE.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".