MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170194840 · doi:10.82308/22871

Problematizing youth radicalization in Canadian educational spaces

2015· article· en· W3170194840 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashley Manuel

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadicalizationPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsCriminologyGender studiesPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research determines whether Canadian educational spaces in the past have had any bearing on the radicalization of youth. As globalization creates tensions, insecurity and confusion for young people in relation to their identity, the radicalization of young Canadians poses a significant threat to maintaining national security. Though radicalization within Canadian educational institutions is far less prevalent than usually assumed in today's security-obsessed society, education's role as a social institution provides an important site to investigate this concern. A qualitative analysis of the educational experiences of Donald Andrews, Marc Lépine and Saad Khalid, each of whom adopted extremist belief systems in Canada during their youth, was conducted to uncover what kind of an influence schools played in their radicalization process. Results indicated that the sentiments of alienation and marginalization that fuelled their radicalization were exacerbated within their school settings. Therefore, the value of critical pedagogy is brought to light in order to demonstrate that by supporting the healthy development and social integration of its young people, educational spaces can indeed be utilized to prevent social isolation, a major driving force in the radicalization of youth.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicEducation Discipline and InequalityFrench-language works237,207