The Market Economy Discourse on Education: Interpretation, Impact, and Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article suggests that the most serious threat posed to contemporary education is the deleterious impact that market economy policies have on current curriculum theory and development. It explores the market economy discourse on education that emerges internationally from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and domestically from private institutions such as the Conference Board of Canada (CBOC) and public ministries such as Industry Canada. These various organizations promote the market economy discourse on education by framing discussions on curriculum policy between government and business interests. By referring to the primary sources of the market economy discourse on education, then, this article draws attention to the global economic vision currently shaping Canadian schools and explores its impact on domestic education policy. Further, it proposes a means whereby those teachers holding a less intractable perspective on education might resist the current market economy siege on schools. Ironically, this approach involves using the critical tools appropriated by the market economy discourse on education in a manner entirely unintended and unforeseen by its supporters.
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 | 0.022 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.119 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".