MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1939347740 · doi:10.25071/1916-9272.21055

Equity in Education: Policy and Implementation – Examining Ontario's Anti-racism Education Guidelines and their Application in the Peel District School Board

2009· article· en· W1939347740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yolande Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Public Policy Administration and Law · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican cultural and philosophical studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRacismSchool districtEquity (law)Racial biasGender equitySociologyAnti-racismPolitical sciencePublic administrationPedagogyMedical educationPublic relationsMedicineGender studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changing demographics have challenged policy practitioners to implement diverse services and programs to meet the needs of urban populations. This is especially true in the area of equity in education in the Ontario public school system with regard to race and ethnicity. When reflecting on statistics that show that minority students, particularly those of African descent, are falling between the cracks, one wonders what policies and/or initiatives the Ontario Ministry of Education has put forth to positively affect years of negative trends. This article examines two areas of one such policy document, Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity in School Boards: Guidelines for Policy Development and Implementation, and its effectiveness in implementing anti-racist and ethnoculturally equitable education in Ontario schools: the discretionary rather than mandated nature of the policy and the resources allotted for implementation.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Public Policy Administration and LawSame topicAfrican cultural and philosophical studiesFrench-language works237,207