The Search for Effective Sexual Violence Policies and Programming on Canadian Post-Secondary Campuses: A Student Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual violence is one of the few crimes in Canada that has not shown a decrease in numbers to this date. While sexual violence has always been present, and frankly, is endemic on Canadian post-secondary campuses, recently the issue has been receiving closer attention from media. The plethora of information sources forces post-secondary institutions to face the difficult discussion of whether or not their institution should implement a post-secondary level policy on sexual violence, as well as educational programs for students, faculty, and staff. These discussions have led numerous colleges and universities to revisit their sexual violence policies and educational programming or lack thereof partially due to the detrimental health effects that victims of sexual violence face due to a lack of support service(s).The writer seeks to add a student’s voice to the national conversation with respect to sexual violence on Canadian post-secondary campuses. This study examines and analyzes the policy framework that contests the emergence of rape culture within the post-secondary educational landscape through various sociological perspectives. The author also discusses the importance of not only the implementation of effective post-secondary institutional policies and educational programming but also the importance of the campus discussion and campus advertising of the policies and services themselves. This study addresses what needs to be done in order to better guarantee student safety. With proper policies in place, students can ensure that their safety and overall well-being are priorities to the educational governing bodies. Discipline: Sociology Faculty Mentor: Dr. Korbla Puplampu
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".