Ending Gender-Based Sexual Violence on Canadian Campuses: Peer Educator Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gender-based and sexual violence (GBSV) remains a pervasive problem in higher education, disproportionately affecting marginalized students and undermining their safety, well-being, and academic success. Post-secondary institutions (PSIs) increasingly rely on peer educators (PeerEds) to deliver prevention and response programs, leveraging their shared student experience to foster trust and engagement. This study explores the motivations and experiences of GBSV PeerEds in Canada and the United States, revealing how personal trauma, institutional critique, and allyship drive their involvement. Findings highlight the emotional labour, secondary trauma, and systemic constraints PeerEds face, alongside their contributions to campus culture and advocacy. The study critiques institutional reliance on marginalized students’ compassion and calls for trauma-informed practices, sustainable funding, and structural reform. Future research should examine PeerEds’ influence on campus subcultures, administrators’ complicity, and the broader legitimacy of peer-led GBSV initiatives. Meaningful change requires confronting institutional complicity and reimagining ethics of care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".