Equality Within the Ranks: A Critical Examination of the Canadian Armed Forces Aim to Create an Inclusive Workspace and Enhance Diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2017 the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) released a revised vision and approach for the department of national defence, entitled “Strong, Secure, Engaged” (“Strong, Secure, Engaged: Canada’s Defence Policy” 2017). This document has a dedicated section on diversity and the significance of drawing upon the different backgrounds and cultural experiences each member brings with them when entering the organization. This section confirms the commitment of the Canadian government and the CAF to ensure that diversity and inclusion are priorities at all levels of supervision and management of personnel. However, many years removed from the implementation of this policy, the inclusion of diversity remains a topic of contention and is a struggle that the institution faces daily. . While the topic of equality and inclusion has many dimensions and considerations, especially within the CAF, this thesis will address the impact of the historical influence that Christian practices and traditions have had and continues to have upon the institution and its aim to enhance diversity and ensure the inclusion and equal treatment of all members. The thesis will question whether the CAF can succeed in its commitment to creating a safe and respectful workplace in light of privileges that exist for Christian beliefs and practices, which often go unaddressed or remain hidden in plain sight. This exploration of this question led to the analysis of legal rulings concerning the freedom of religious expression within the Canadian context; three crucial CAF policies that address the rights and freedoms of serving members; the summary trial of Lt(N) Scott in 2003; and an in-depth examination of the current research and scholarship regarding equality, inclusion, and the accommodation of diversity. What emerged from this analysis was an understanding that the CAF must recognize longstanding privileges favouring Christian practices if the organization intends to succeed in implementing initiatives, policies and procedures focusing on inclusion and diversity. Ultimately, this thesis aims to apply the findings of the examination of Christian privileges and to suggest practical steps that the CAF can implement to create change within the culture of the CAF. Drawing upon the concepts of the lived religion method, Lori Beaman’s deep equality approach, and the concept of mutual respect, this thesis intends to encourage the CAF to look beyond current models and approaches of managing diversity and difference as if it is a problem to be solved. Instead, this thesis intends to encourage the CAF to focus on actively listening to the complexity of the needs of its members. The research and analysis suggest that engaging in this process will permit more voices to be heard and allow diversity to strengthen the institution instead of being a problem that needs accommodation.
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 | 0.031 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.128 | 0.080 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.033 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".