Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2008, the Quebec government implemented the new Ethics and Religious Cultures (ERC) program. Although Quebec's education system had become secular and linguistically divided in 1997, the school boards were given a five year grace period during which they would replace the former religious and moral instruction courses. The new program was promoted as giving all worldviews a fair and equal opportunity while still adhering to Quebec's religious heritage. This thesis examines the space created by Quebec's secular Ethics and Religious Cultures program for atheism as a legitimate worldview. The research accomplishes this by creating an in-depth curricular analysis of the ERC program, while also exploring the term secularism, the prejudice atheism has endured through time, and the historical difficulties Canada had secularizing its once religious education systems.It is hoped this study helps inform educators of the importance of including atheism as a legitimate worldview and also helps develop a clearer understanding of secularism, atheism, and the distinctions between them. Although the ERC program requires teachers to adopt a professional stance of impartiality, this thesis argues that the program allows teachers to side step the conversation about atheism completely, or worse, help reciprocate the negative connotations of an atheistic worldview.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".