The Implementation of Suspension and Expulsion Programs in Two Ontario School Boards
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In 2008, the Ontario Ministry of Education made it mandatory that school boards in the province institute programs to serve suspended and expelled youth. These programs have now been in place for five years. Limited information has been collected as to how effective they are in addressing the needs of these students and little is known about the factors that have had an effect on the implementation of these policies. This study provides a description of the programs and focuses on the factors that have impacted policy implementation in this area. Research has shown that several factors impact policy implementation in general. Among the main influential factors are the impact of policy actors, the conditions that exist, supports that are available and the level and type of central control that is in place. Through one-on-one interviews involving thirteen school and board personnel in two Ontario school boards, this research explored how these four factors had an impact on the policy implementation process as it relates to the suspension and expulsion programs. The study participants believed that the relationships within and between these four factors and the creativity and flexibility this allowed were important in their ability to implement the new policies. Collaborative relationships between school board personnel and their community partners were highlighted in both participating boards as encouraging policy implementation. Strong relationships between staff, the students, and their families were important in finding program solutions for the particular conditions that existed, especially in the rural board that participated in the study. The importance of strong relationships between board personnel and community partners was also stressed, especially in the board that had a combined urban and rural make-up. Two-way communication between board and Ministry personnel allowed for the provision of appropriate supports in order to keep the programs viable. I conclude that when it comes to implementing new policies, central control from the Ministry should demonstrate an understanding of the distinct situations that exist in each board, the importance of key relationships, and the need for flexibility in allowing for creative responses to the needs that exist.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,019 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».