Struggling for education: The dynamics of student protests in Chile and Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims at explaining the emergence and magnitude of student protests in Chile in 2011 and in Quebec in 2012. These two societies witnessed unprecedented levels of student mobilization that cannot be accounted for simply by pointing out existing resources and political cultures. Although the latter did play a role in shaping the mobilization – insofar as in both Chile and Quebec the student movement is well organized, is composed of dense networks of formal as well as informal organizations and has been characterized by contentious practices for a long time – they cannot alone explain the timing and the duration of the 2011–2012 protests. The authors thus propose to treat organizational resources and political culture as initial conditions and draw on the work of McAdam, Tarrow and Tilly to focus on three processes that were critical in determining the growth and trajectory of the conflict: (1) mediation, as a result of communication and coalition work among student organizations and the emergence of new collectives that redefined past lines of division; (2) polarization, as a result of both a closed structure of political opportunities and a radicalization of student demands; and (3) spillover, as student movements extended beyond initial issues and goals and fostered other mobilizations. These three processes did not evolve in sequence but instead in parallel, conditioning one another. By showing that similar mechanisms can generate relatively similar effects in different contexts, this study contributes to assessing their robustness. Furthermore, by comparing a case from the Global North with one from the Global South the study contributes to making social movement studies less parochial.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".