Us and Them, Now and Then: \nA historical comparison of the representation of diversity \nand gender equality in Québec’s elementary school textbook illustrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research project investigates how diversity and gender equality have been represented in textbook illustrations in the Canadian province of Québec. It will compare illustrations produced in the 1960s, when the province went through one of its most significant cultural shifts, known as the Quiet Revolution, with those produced in the 2010s. The objective of this investigation is to see how cultural shifts can be perceived in the form of visuals intended for elementary school children and how they work as a window to the understanding of a changing society. Representation, feminism, immigration, tolerance and acceptance are recurrent themes discussed in this project. \nAlso, this project aims to bring the discussion of the use of illustration for educational purposes to the field of design. A recent surge in research papers that debate the importance of diverse literature and textbooks for children shows an increasing interest in the topic. However, the scholars writing those papers belong to the fields of the social sciences, child psychology and pedagogy, but not to design. \nThis project advocates for designers’ active participation in building knowledge about diversity in children’s literature and textbook illustration. Considering how designers have an active role in the production of books and how papers analyzing diversity in children’s books may at some point critique the outcome of graphic designers’ and illustrators’ work, research from a design perspective becomes necessary. \nKeywords: textbook, graphic design, illustration, education, diversity, multiculturalism
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".