MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Skilling for Life/Living for Skill: The Social Construction of Life Skills in Ontario Schools

2018· article· en· W181614420 on OpenAlex
Alison I. Griffith

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of educational thought. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife skillsPsychologySocial lifeSocial skillsPedagogyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMathematics educationSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the course of conducting interviews with teachers, administrators and community workers about life skills programs in the school system and in the community, we came to take a stance opposite to that of the educators with whom we spoke. We found the life skills curriculum in both the separate and public education systems to be an ideological process embedded in administrative concerns about student "attitudes" and student "discipline." The concept of life skills assembles a set of understandings which organizes individuals' lives in the conceptual relevance’s of the labor process. Life skills courses place students' lives and concerns in the curriculum while at the same time providing the basis on which those concerns can be rationalized and fitted to the cultural understandings generated in the capitalist mode of production which characterizes Canadian society. It is a conceptual frame through which the complexity of life processes becomes reduced to a set of skills.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.349 · 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