The badge and the baccalaureate: an analysis of attitudes and beliefs associated with policing and higher education in Ontario, from a management perspective
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study utilized a cross-sectional, dual data collection methodology to solicit police management (command and senior officers') attitudes and beliefs towards five distinct vectors or quadrants associated with policing and higher education (Expectations, Relevance, Financial Rewards, Promotions and Resources). A quantitative e-mail survey, employing a 5-point Likert scale and an optional qualitative follow-up semi-structured interview method of inquiry were employed. The multistage data collection process utilized a combination of both probability and non-probability sampling techniques. Surveys ( n=100) were distributed to command senior officers within the five participating Greater Toronto Area police services—The Toronto Police Service, the Durham Regional Police Service, York Regional Police Service, Peel Regional Police Service and the Ontario Provincial Police. From the 82 survey respondents, 24 were interviewed. The survey and follow-up interview sought specifically to answer three research questions, associated to the aforementioned 5 Vectors. In addition three hypotheses arising from the five independent variables and the twenty-seven dependent survey items were also cross tabulated. Findings indicate that command and senior officers modally believe that, the current minimum entry level educational standard should not be raised, that some level of higher education is necessary to meet the future needs of policing, educational attainment and wages should not be linked and that current financial support for members pursing higher education is sufficient. It was also observed that police management felt that, promotions should not be linked to educational attainment; all command officers should have a minimum baccalaureate degree, it is too costly to fully subsidize higher education for all members, and that other expenditures take priority over funding higher education. Emerging from the study was also evidence of significant disparity in educational benefit policy across jurisdictions. Command and senior officers were surprisingly unaware of the magnitude of such disparity and its ramifications. An additional outgrowth of this research was to highlight the premium value placed upon pre-hire military experience by police management. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».