MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7052284001

Safe schools for (almost) everyone: the Christian Right's resistance to Ontario's LGBT inclusive 'Accepting Schools Act'

2016· other· en· W7052284001 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrostatic Discharge in Electronics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)Rhetorical questionChristian rightPoliticsResistance (ecology)Discourse analysisContent analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Christian Right is an important and influential voice in contemporary political discourses and popular culture within Canadian society. This research seeks to analyze the discourses and framing strategies utilized in arguments by the following Christian Right organizations in Ontario: The Institute for Canadian Values, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, and the Family Coalition Party. Each of these groups opposes the passage of Bill 13: Accepting Schools Act. The aim of the Bill was to introduce LGBT inclusive anti-bullying policies into all Ontario classrooms. A comprehensive content analysis of standing committee transcripts, official documents, multimedia records of interviews, transcripts or public speaking events, and websites/articles produced by these Christian Right organizations in Ontario are analyzed to uncover recurring themes, patterns and objectives of current discourses surrounding this issue. This research provides insights into the rhetorical strategies being utilized by these Christian Right organizations in Ontario as they fight the Accepting Schools Act.

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)0.002
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.021
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.164 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicElectrostatic Discharge in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207