Why do parents choose independent Catholic schools? A qualitative study of high school choice in Winnipeg, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although they educate a sizeable minority of the province’s students, there has been little research done on Catholic schools in Manitoba. This thesis begins to fill a void in one area of that research: parental school choice of Winnipeg’s Catholic high schools. Beginning with a broad overview of Catholic school choice and reviewing literature from Canada, Australia, and the United States, this thesis explores which parents choose Winnipeg’s Catholic high schools and what reasons they have for doing so. It draws on three interrelated social theories—social identity, secular goods, and vicarious religion— for its theoretical base, alongside Bourdieu’s theory of habitus. Semi-structured interviews with 13 parents were conducted between November 2019 and March 2020. Findings from these interviews indicated that religious and academic reasons were parents’ primary selection criteria. Parental education and generational effects also correlated with parental choice of Winnipeg’s Catholic schools. Further research should be done on the motivations of non-Christian parents in selecting these schools, as well as parents who considered Catholic schools but opted for alternatives.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".