MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1939232245 · doi:10.29173/cjs4170

Jeffrey Henig, Spin Cycle: How Research is Used in Policy Debates: The Case of Charter Schools

2008· article· en· W1939232245 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Scott Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Sociology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEducational Assessment and Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterSociologyPublic administrationPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C harter schools are the marvels of contemporary American educa- tion, having gone from virtual obscurity just 15 years ago, to now numbering about 4000 schools, and enlisting US presidents among their supporters.Their aim is to make public education more accountable, innovative, and decentralized.Charter school laws grant funds and operating autonomy to a variety of providers in exchange for their compliance with a distinct mandate, such as serving specific populations, offering unique pedagogies, or meeting various performance indicators.These schools are a lesser phenomenon in Canada, with only a dozen such entities currently operating in Alberta, and having been discussed in policy circles in only a few other provinces.The social forces that make these schools far more popular and controversial in the United States provide the focus of this book.Jeffrey Henig's thoughtful, engaging, and informed book uses the American debate on charter schools to speak to the wider role of research in democratic deliberation.At local levels, supporters champion these schools as escape routes from ineffective school boards, while opponents see them as diverting scarce funds from needy public schools.At the national level, this debate takes on a deeper ideological tenor.Supporters tout charter schools as emblems of much-needed market incentives in education, and as permanent solutions to the inherent failings of public bureaucracy.Opponents see charter schools as an initial step onto a slippery slope of full-blown privatization that can only exacerbate social inequalities and undermine civic cohesion.Henig's analysis of the political infrastructure that supports this debate, and the role played by research within it, provides worthwhile reading for educational and noneducational scholars, in the United States and Canada alike.Yet the book draws its inspiration from a unique event.In August 2004, the New York Times reported a study sponsored by the American Federation of Teachers which claimed that standardized test scores were lower among charter school students than among those in public schools.This finding was newsworthy because charter schools

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.322
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of SociologySame topicEducational Assessment and ImprovementFrench-language works237,207