MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801111753 · doi:10.17159/obiter.v28i1.14290

CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES TO SCHOOL RULES*

2022· article· en· W2801111753 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueObiter · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Issues in South Africa
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceLawLaw and economicsComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following four court applications set the stage for the debate on challenges to school disciplinary rules during the past two years:In July 2005, the mother of Sunali Pillay brought an application in the Equality Court against the principal and governing body of Durban Girls’ High School. The application aimed to restrain the school from taking disciplinary action against her daughter based on the girl’s refusal to remove a nose stud which was regarded by the school as a violation of the school’s code of conduct. The grounds for the application were that their refusal violated her constitutional rights to equality and freedom of religion, conscience, belief and culture. In September 2005, the Western Cape Residents’ Association brought an application in the Cape High Court on behalf of the parents of Bernel Williams. The application was to ensure her attendance at the matric farewell function hosted by Parow High School. It was argued that the school’s refusal to allow her to attend the function, based on her continued unacceptable behaviour, infringed her constitutional right to equality, dignity and freedom of expression. Similarly, the Supreme Court of Canada had to determine, on 2 March 2006, whether the refusal by the school authorities to allow an orthodox Sikh student, Gurbaj Singh, to wear a kirpan (religious object resembling a dagger) to the school he was attending, was an infringement of his freedom of religion under section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On 22 March 2006, the House of Lords in England decided in favour of the decision by the head-teacher and governors of Denbigh High School to exclude Shabina Begun from the school unless she conformed to the schooldress code. Begun insisted on wearing a hijab (long coat-like garment) and not the shalwar kameeze she had been wearing for the previous two years and which, according to the evidence, satisfied the Islamic clothing requirements. She argued that her exclusion infringed inter alia on her right to manifest her religion under art 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.In all these matters the constitutional rights of the learner were weighed up against the right of the school to ensure a disciplined environment through the strict observance of the school rules. Although only two of the four applications were successful, it is encouraging that parents and learners are prepared to test decisions taken by schools – an indication that a human rights culture is taking root at secondary school level on both a national and international level.The aim of this note is to discuss these judgments within the parameters of the rights of learners vis-à-vis the rights of other learners and the necessity for discipline and a safe schooling environment. The first section of the note is devoted to an examination of each of these judgments. Thereafter, the issues are discussed with specific reference to the South African constitutional principles and the application of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.281 · 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