The Jewish Identifies of Toronto: An Examination of Toronto Jewish Identity Construction Through an Analysis of UJA’s Annual Campaign 2012 ‘Jewish Toronto Lives Here’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Jewish identities of the Toronto Jewish community are complex, overlapping and multifaceted. United Jewish Appeal of Greater Toronto (UJA) is the main international Jewish philanthropy and the main Jewish philanthropic organization in Toronto. Through an examination of UJA’s 2012 annual campaign, ‘Jewish Toronto Lives Here,’ it is possible to explore how UJA has engaged in a dialogue with its community stakeholders and supporters to determine what Jewish identities exist in Toronto and construct what Jewish Toronto means. Using grounded theory to derive the identity concepts from UJA’s 2012 annual campaign, it is apparent that there are at least eight Jewish identities in Toronto in 2012. These identities relate to religion, ethnicity, history, education, preparing for the future, advocacy, repairing the world and Israel and are depicted in the campaign through references to UJA-supported institutions and initiatives. While UJA speaks to each of these identities in the campaign, the identities are never directly defined. This lack of definition enables UJA to oversee an inclusive and diverse Jewish community in Toronto. Through an application of Judith Butler’s gender theory and Martin Buber’s phenomenological approach to the data one can better comprehend how Jewish identity is potentially performed, while also being an intrinsic aspect of community members, in Jewish Toronto. UJA’s approach of non-definition and openness to different approaches to identity is a possible method that other organizations can look to when deciding how to communicate to a diverse group of stakeholders.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".