Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study provides the perspectives of young people on how applied communication strategies can be used more effectively to address racism and discrimination in their lives.Interviews and focus groups were conducted with 25 youth from four communities: Pitt Meadows, Surrey, Vancouver and Vernon.The general research questions explored were: youth's experiences with racism and discrimination, the type of methods and messages that appeal to them and what would lead them to take action against racism and discrimination.The data gathered were analyzed and interpreted using aspects of a grounded theory approach.The data were coded and categorized to develop general themes and patterns.The study concludes with recommendations on how racism and discrimination can be addressed in our schools.The results indicate that racism and discrimination are serious problems impacting the lives of young people that require immediate intervention.All the participants had experienced or witnessed racism or discrimination.Some participants considered suicide, dropped out of school or used drugs and alcohol as coping strategies.The research has important implications for the education system.Most participants did not find school staff were responsive to or understood their experiences.Students need to feel safer in school environments and know that there are support systems they can turn to for help.The youth varied in the type of strategies they found effective.It is recommended that a multi-media communication campaign should be developed to address racism and discrimination incorporating the use of television and popular culture.Youth involvement in the development and implementation of campaigns is critical in successfully reaching other youth.Parents, communities and government agencies also have a responsibility in working with and supporting youth to prevent racism and discrimination. iii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".