Exploring Gender and Identity in Ontario’s Early Years Curriculum Documents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding how Ontario Ministry of Education (OME) early years’ curriculum and framework documents, such as The Kindergarten Program (OME, 2016), How Does Learning Happen? (OME, 2014) and ELECT (BSEPEL, 2007) set the expectations for fostering gender and identity formation is increasingly vital in contemporary society. Educators need to understand how the mandated documents feed their practice and influence what is understood by educators as “appropriate” gendered practices and identities. Drawing on a poststructural feminist perspective (Blaise & Taylor, 2012), the authors examine these early years’ documents for systemic or structural aspects that suggest the formation of specific gender identities. Specifically, this study explores the language and systemic gender beliefs contained in the three documents identified above. The study also examines how specific ideologies may influence gender identity formation in young children. The authors expect to find that these curriculum and framework documents do not support educators in fostering the formation of gender identities, particularly those which are outside of heteronormative expectations.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".