MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W321783790

Introduction: multicultural futures? Challenges and solutions/Avenirs multiculturels? Problemes et solutions

2006· article· en· W321783790 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Chedly Belkhodja, John A. Biles, Ian Donaldson, Jennifer Hyndman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian ethnic studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismDiversity (politics)ImmigrationAdmirationPolitical scienceState (computer science)Abandonment (legal)Political economySociologyLawGender studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2006 Canada's official multiculturalism policy celebrated its thirty-fifth birthday. What better time to stop and reflect on where we are, where we would like to go, and how we expect to get there. This special issue of Canadian Ethnic Studies/Etudes ethniques au Canada does exactly that. Over the years, multiculturalism has come to evoke a peaceful image of an integration-based model in which many cultures live together within one nation-state. As Canada has evolved, the success of its multiculturalism policies has earned it worldwide admiration, though the policies are not without their critics and weaknesses. While it is recognized as a liberal country that welcomes diversity and can transform itself over time by including diversity in the social fabric, Canada must also deal with conflicts within and between groups of immigrants. At Canada's core is the duality of its two European colonizing peoples. However, during the twentieth century, Canada evolved into a country that acknowledges diversity, a policy that gained explicit recognition in the early 1970s and which came to the fore in the 1980s. Nevertheless, in the early years of the twenty-first century, tensions have emerged, and many countries moved rapidly away from multiculturalism, including Denmark, Australia, the Netherlands, and now the United Kingdom. Ironically, the same range of tensions faces states that have never espoused multiculturalism as an approach, states such as France and the United States, thus suggesting that the policy prescription of rapid abandonment of multiculturalism might, at its most benign, be useless in addressing these tensions, and perhaps, at its worst, be counter productive. While there are unquestionably prominent critics of multiculturalism in Canadian public discourse, they are not the dominant voices. Critics usually emerge in full voice following incidents like the terrorist attacks of 9/11, or the arrest of terrorist suspects like the 23 of Operation Thread in 2003, or of the Toronto 17 (apparently now 18) in the summer of 2006. Even when the charges are dropped, as they were in the case of Operation Thread, critics maintain that they might have been wrong that particular time, but multiculturalism will still be responsible for our demise as a society. Admittedly, these vocal criticisms vary considerably between English and French language media portrayals, with the latter being generally far more moderate, as Belkhodja and Richard's article suggests, although the present debate surrounding reasonable accommodation is more intemperate than the usual coverage of diversity issues in the French press. The debate mainly focusses on the dialogue and engagement necessary for coexistence in a society that is, incontrovertably and historically, multicultural. In terms of demographics, Canada's population growth will increasingly depend on immigration and will become increasingly diverse. According to Statistics Canada projections, the number of visible minority persons in Canada could reach between 6,313,000 and 8,109,000 by 2017, or about 20 percent of the population, while Canadians of non-Christian religious affiliations are expected to comprise between 3,049,100 and 3,898,800, or roughly 11 percent of the population (Statistics Canada 2005). Further discussion of these demographic projections can be found in the Perspective piece by Kamal Dib of the Multiculturalism Program at the Department of Canadian Heritage at the end of this special issue. In the face of this accelerating change, new stresses have joined pre-existing strains. It becomes increasingly important to address challenges posed by religious pluralism in an avowedly secular country. Similarly, the intersections of identities like gender, race, religion, language, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age, and region are increasingly hard to address within the parameters of existing policy and programs. Meanwhile, pre-existing strains such as economic inequalities persist. …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian ethnic studiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207