De l’ACFO à l’AFO. Le projet politique multiculturel et le ministère du patrimoine canadien comme facteurs d’influence dans la refonte de l’Association canadienne-française de l’Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose le récit de la transformation institutionnelle de l’Association canadienne-française de l’Ontario (ACFO) entre les années 1970 et le milieu des années 2000. L’ACFO rejette d’abord le multiculturalisme comme étant concurrent au projet politique biculturel. Mais sa position change graduellement, jusqu’à voir le bilinguisme canadien comme complémentaire au projet politique multiculturel. L’ACFO est ensuite confrontée à la question de sa légitimité comme organisme représentatif de la francophonie ontarienne dès le milieu des années 1990. L’impératif de sa restructuration, donné par le ministère du Patrimoine canadien, débouchera en 2006 sur la fusion entre la structure de financement du ministère et de l’ancienne ACFO, qui deviendra alors l’Assemblée de la francophonie de l’Ontario (AFO). Ces transformations du monde associatif franco-ontarien se déroulent sur la toile de fond des référendums pour la souveraineté québécoise et du rapatriement de la constitution canadienne en 1982.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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".