MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401980401 · doi:10.3390/rel15091046

The Relevancy of Religious Literacy in Social Studies Curricula: Quebec’s CCQ as a Case Study

2024· article· en· W4401980401 on OpenAlexaffabout
W. Y. Alice Chan, Sivane Hirsch, Hicham Tiflati

Bibliographic record

VenueReligions · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Education and Schools
Canadian institutionsJohn Abbott CollegeUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumLiteracySociologyPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores Quebec’s recent transition from the “Ethics and Religious Culture” (ERC) program to the “Culture and Citizenship in Quebec” (CCQ) program, emphasizing the role of religious literacy in secular societies. We investigate the rationale behind the shift, and examine the ERC’s focus on fostering understanding of diverse religious and ethical perspectives as well as CCQ’s broader mandate to integrate cultural and civic education and its aim at the development of a shared and common public Quebecois culture. The case study highlights the pedagogical and societal implications of this change, discussing how the CCQ program aims to enhance civic engagement, cultural awareness, and social cohesion. Furthermore, the article identifies opportunities for educators to address pressing global challenges, such as polarization, reconciliation, and the climate crisis, within the new curriculum framework. By promoting critical thinking, inclusivity, and active citizenship, fostering religious literacy in such programs presents a unique opportunity for educators and youth to contribute to a more resilient and harmonious society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.413 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligionsSame topicReligious Education and SchoolsFrench-language works237,207