Government Legitimacy and Anti-Discrimination: Considering the Implications for LGBTQ Bullying in Ontario’s Publicly Funded Catholic Schools when Religious and Secular Ideologies Conflict
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the fall of 2015, the long in development Ontario Health and Physical Education curriculum was updated to reflect the current challenges faced by students in Ontario schools. It came not without much controversy, particularly from religious conservatives due to the changes made to language concerning sexuality, homosexuality, and gender identity. This study aimed to ascertain whether the existing environment in Catholic schools was more conducive to LGBTQ student bullying due to heteronormative religious doctrine, and how this doctrine might affect teachers in Catholic schools who must also adhere to secular curricula. It found that scholarly research appeared to be lacking in these areas, and that the lack of studies focused on these issues reflected the Catholic board’s reticence to participate in the research. Furthermore, findings suggest that LGBTQ discrimination might indeed be a greater issue in Catholic schools due to the presence of conflicting religious and secular ideologies, as well as the contradictory instruction given to teachers from various parties with differing beliefs on how Catholic children may be educated.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".