MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981102486 · doi:10.1353/ces.2019.0010

50 Years Of Canadian Multiculturalism: Accounting for its Durability, Theorizing the Crisis, Anticipating the Future

2019· article· en· W2981102486 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Augie Fleras

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian ethnic studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismSalience (neuroscience)NormativeCorporate governancePolitical economyPolitical scienceDiversity (politics)Nexus (standard)SociologyEconomic geographyPositive economicsLawEconomicsPsychologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Is there a future for Canadian multiculturalism as national policy, normative framework, and governance regime in a postmulticultural world of shifting demographics, new mobilities, and multiple identities? In response to a question that evokes both dismay and disagreement, this paper analyzes and assesses the salience and prospects of Canada's official multiculturalism through the prism of a postmulticultural lens. However durable and popular as a diversity governance model, an official multiculturalism is showing signs of crisis since it is no longer theoretically attuned to the demands of a rapidly changing, highly mobile, and diversely complex world. The paper argues that any move beyond multiculturalism as diversity governance is not about rejection or retreat. More accurately, it's about building on multiculturalism's positives while moving positively forward in ways more responsive to new realities, evolving trends, and creative possibilities. This paper also proposes a re-energized multicultural governance model for living together with/in/through a complexity of differences across a global/national/local nexus.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian ethnic studiesSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207