MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W175019724

Safe Schools and Zero Tolerance: Policy, Program and Practice in Ontario.

2008· article· en· W175019724 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Yvette Daniel, Karla Bondy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZero tolerancePanacea (medicine)Zero (linguistics)SituatedInterpretation (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)State (computer science)Public policyPublic administrationNorm (philosophy)Political scienceSociologyComputer scienceLawLinguisticsMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines zero tolerance discipline policies in Ontario’s public school system legislated as the Safe Schools Act ( SSA ) 2001. The intent of our paper is to argue that the SSA set within a discourse of zero tolerance as the panacea to the problems of violence in schools has had a detrimental impact. Since the SSA is part of the episteme of standardized solutions to complex problems, Ball’s interpretation of “policy as text” and “policy as discourse” serves as the guiding framework for the study in which we examine the perspectives of professionals who implement these measures. In conclusion we state that the discursive frames within which zero tolerance policies are situated have shifted to some extent in order to consider other possibilities to the zero tolerance approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0250.018
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicEducation Discipline and InequalityFrench-language works237,207