Survey of the Effects of Law 21 on Students and Staff in Faculties of Education in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A working group of the Observatoire sur la Formation à la Diversité et l’Équité conducted a survey of the impacts of Law 21, the Act respecting the Laicity of the State, during its first year of application on faculties and departments of education across Québec. Although the law is not supposed to affect universities or student teachers, since they are not employees of the Centres de services scolaires or school boards, findings from among the 972 survey respondents (students and staff in Québec faculties of education) associate Law 21 with negative and discriminatory treatment of student teachers during teaching internships, more polarized and conflictual interactions in university classrooms, and negative effects on the well-being, as well as academic and professional achievement, of students. The survey shows that discriminatory situations or effects related to Law 21, as reported by respondents, disproportionally affect those who are undergraduate students, identify as female, are immigrants or of immigrant background, have a first language other than French, and belong to a visible or religious minority. It also indicates that Québec universities have adopted specific measures in response to Law 21 to try to prevent such discriminatory experiences, but some of these have had stigmatizing or exclusionary effects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".