Digital Citizenship in Ontario Education: A Concept Analysis
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
Digital citizenship indicates one’s place in digitized society; however academics have not established a cohesive understanding about how digital citizenship is characterized. The Ontario Ministry of Education also does not provide a central conceptualization of digital citizenship and instead encourages Ontario school boards to construct and communicate ideas of digital citizenship. Accordingly, Ontario policymakers, educators, and students use differing understandings of digital citizenship, which ultimately impedes educational initiatives and hinders the overall development of the concept. For this paper, therefore, I inquired as to how Ontario public school boards portray digital citizenship. Using concept analysis, I examined digital citizenship documents from the 10 largest English Ontario public school boards. The results suggest that digital citizenship is predominately characterized by responsible and ethical technology use. I conclude with a discussion about how this representation relates to democratic citizenship more broadly and the implications this may have on youth civic engagement. Keywords: digital citizenship; technologies and education; democracy and education; democratic citizenship; concept analysis
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it