Evaluating the impact of Bill 101 on the English-speaking communities of Quebec
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Though forty years of language policies much improved the status and use of French in Quebec, laws such as Bill 101 played a role in reducing the demographic and institutional vitality of the English-speaking communities of Quebec (ESCQ). Pro-French laws maintained Francophones at close to 80% of the Quebec population and ensured that 95% of the Quebec population acquired knowledge of French. Language laws contributed to the decline of Anglophone mother tongue speakers from 13% of the population in 1971 to 7.5% in 2016, while increasing to 70% French/English bilingualism amongst Anglophones. With a net interprovincial loss of over 310,000 Anglophones who left Quebec for the rest of Canada (ROC), results show that Anglophones who stayed in Quebec are less educated and earn lower income than Quebec Francophones. Language laws limiting access to English schools succeeded in reducing the size of the English school system from 256, 251 pupils in 1971 (100%) to only 96,235 pupils in 2018 (37%). While the Anglophone minority bemoan their demographic and institutional decline in education, health care, and government services, many Francophones remains concerned about threats to French by bilingualism in Montreal and their minority status in Canada and North America.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it