Bibliographic record
Abstract
A principal forbids same-sex prom dates. A community group tries to prohibit gender-neutral bathrooms. Despite growing acceptance of 2SLGBTQ+ rights, Canadian schools regularly become battlegrounds in clashes between students wishing to express their sexuality or gender identity and those who perceive this as a threat to their values. Making the Case clearly shows how Canadian law responds to “competing” human rights claims, when there is a clash between people asserting sexual minority rights and those asserting religious rights. The authors call on related court cases to explain the position of Canadian law. They demonstrate that Canadians have rights to religion and rights to gender expression or sexual orientation; and that supporting sexual minority rights does not undermine other people’s rights to religious freedom. This accessible book is an important tool for anyone working to create an inclusive school environment, or needing to respond to a rights-based conflict within their school.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.024 |
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".