MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408901650 · doi:10.29303/jeef.v5i1.819

Tradition, Family Issues, and Educational Values in a Chinese-Canadian Living in Toronto: Analysis on Turning Red (2022)

2025· article· en· W4408901650 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jihan Medina Ramadhani, Cipto Wardoyo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of English Education Forum (JEEF) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Education and Multiculturalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyChinese familyFamily valuesMedia studiesPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the animated film Turning Red as a narrative that explores cultural identity, generational conflict, and self-discovery within the Chinese-Canadian diaspora. By employing qualitative research and narrative text analysis, the research focuses on how the film portrays the tension between traditional values and modern influences in shaping the protagonist Mei Lee’s identity. The story follows Mei, a 13-year-old Toronto teenager, as she navigates adolescence, family expectations, and her transformation into a red panda, which symbolizes emotional change. The film highlights the clash between Mei and her mother Ming, who adheres strictly to cultural traditions, emphasizing Mei’s desire to forge her own path. Through empathy and communication, Mei and Ming reconcile their differences, highlighting the importance of familial relationships. The red panda serves as a powerful symbol for self-acceptance and the blending of heritage with personal growth. Overall, Turning Red offers valuable insights into cultural representation, identity formation, and the universal theme of family.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0190.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of English Education Forum (JEEF)Same topicGlobal Education and MulticulturalismFrench-language works237,207