Religious Diversity in Canadian Public Schools: Rethinking the Role of Law. <i>By Dia Dabby</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detailed yet accessible for the generalist reader, this book captures the complexity of engaging with and responding to religious diversity in Canada. In explaining that schools are a microcosm of society, Dabby examines three Canadian cases: Chamberlain v. Surrey School District No. 36, Multani v. Commision scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, and SL v. Commission scolaire des chenes. To prepare readers for this discussion, the book is like a lesson where readers are introduced to each case while learning about the differing Canadian legal systems and educational institutions across each province discussed. In this way, this book is a must-read reference guide for any reader, especially jurists, interested in the changing and varying religious diversity across Canadian public schools, and in relation to the legal systems, institutions, and history in the provinces. Chapter 1, titled “Everyday Law in Schools,” introduces readers to the provincial and territorial jurisdiction of education and law in Canada, including the presence and recognition of religious or spiritual diversity (or lack of) in the educational curriculum and related legal acts in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Quebec, among other provinces. This impressive and unique compilation of data foregrounds readers for the following chapters to understand the need for context-specific conversations with respect to religious diversity and law in Canadian public schools.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".