Representing and Supporting Children from Homosexual Families in the Elementary Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research focuses on the education and well-being of children from homosexual families in the classroom. This study explores how teachers are currently representing children from homosexual families, their understandings of these children’s experiences and the resources available to them to support their students. The study investigates the experiences of three educators in the Greater Toronto Area, one of whom shares her own experiences in schools. The findings indicate that there is currently a gap between what teachers are undertaking in their classrooms and what children from homosexual families would appreciate. The findings also highlight certain barriers that prevent teachers from introducing these topics such as their understandings of the topic, the lack of pre-service professional education and fears of stakeholder backlash. The four reported themes mirror the literature in the field: 1) the importance of teacher knowledge, 2) the need for early years education, 3) the need to create safe environments, and 4) the long-term impacts on children. This research paper encourages future teachers to seek out information and support these marginalized communities in their classrooms. It also provides suggestions and strategies on how to ensure a safe and inclusive environment for all.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".