Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the practice of accommodating irregular migrant children in Canadian public schools, specifically, public schools in Toronto, Ontario. Estimates indicate that there are close to 500,000 irregular migrants in Canada; half are thought to be living in the City of Toronto. Since the early 1990s there have been several novel policy developments in Ontario that have facilitated access to public schooling for irregular migrant children. This project seeks to identify the normative ideas that have been appealed to by public authorities in the policy development process. First, a critical review is undertaken of theoretical justifications developed in moral and political theory for extending schooling rights to irregular migrant children in liberal states. Then, arguments put forward by public authorities in Canada for extending or limiting schooling rights are analysed and compared with the dominant normative frameworks in the theoretical literature. This research finds that public authorities at the sub-state level made use of normative arguments that fall outside common theoretical approaches in moral and political theory. Normative arguments at the sub-state level are found to cohere with a fiduciary conception of public authority. It is argued that fiduciary theory provides a systematic and innovative theoretical framework for understanding the normative ideas appealed to by public authorities in practice. Moreover, fiduciary theory makes available the normative resources necessary to provide a strong way of conceptualising the duty of public authorities to educate irregular migrant children. This research contributes both to theoretical scholarship aimed at understanding and conceptualizing obligations to irregular migrant children, and also to the field of Canadian Studies, by contextualizing the policy response to irregular migrant children in Canada over time, demonstrating how specific policy responses reflect shifting normative understandings about belonging, government obligation, national culture(s) of citizenship, and the scope of provision of social welfare services to irregular migrant children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".