MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399382184 · doi:10.3828/qs.2024.7

Bill C-13 and the Constitutionally Conflicting Bilingualism in Canada: An Analysis of Three Provincial Approaches to Separate French Education Following the Implementation of the Official Languages Act and Its Larger Impact

2024· article· en· W4399382184 on OpenAlexaffabout
Victoria Pelky

Bibliographic record

VenueQuebec Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscience of multilingualismPolitical scienceLawLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Official Languages Act (OLA) was enacted in 1969, making French and English the official languages of Canada. On May 13, 2023, the federal government amended the OLA for the first time since its creation in 1969 through Bill C-13. While scholars focus on what has been noted as the “big issue” with Bill C-13 – the possible excessive use of the “notwithstanding clause” – I argue that the impact of provincial legislation produced in response to Bill C-13 has been overlooked. By examining the historical rise of official language rights in Canada and the position of French-speaking minorities in Ontario, New Brunswick, and Alberta and their fight for separate French education, I shed light on the history of bilingualism and the competing federal-provincial laws following its application in 1969. I assert that despite various efforts by the federal government to implement language laws to protect francophone minorities and encourage bilingualism as a national narrative, calculated actions at provincial levels reflect the dominant Anglo-Saxon narrative rooted deep within the nation. The lack of unity between federal and provincial governments results in indirect, competing definitions of Canadian national identity and continued questioning of the place of bilingualism in Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuebec StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207