MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988522278 · doi:10.2304/power.2010.2.3.300

Reform, Ideology and the Politics of <i>Waiting for ‘Superman’</i>

2010· article· en· W1988522278 on OpenAlex
Robert Jean LeBlanc

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePower and Education · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSchool Choice and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsSupermanCharterRhetoricIdeologyMiraclePoliticsNarrativeEducation reformPublic administrationSociologySchool choicePanacea (medicine)Political scienceLawHigher educationHistoryLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the United States, charter schools have been proclaimed as the potential solution for a host of problems for inner-city education, particularly as a cure-all for marginal achievement scores on high-stakes standardized testing. Several US states and cities (most prominently Texas, New York, Atlanta and Washington, DC) have embraced this neo-liberal vision of educational reform as a ‘miracle’ panacea and injected business-derived principles into schools to much fanfare and few authentic positive results. This article focuses on the rhetoric of market-driven solutions for school reform as exemplified in Davis Guggenheim's 2010 documentary Waiting for ‘Superman’. Contextualizing the film within a milieu of recent reform and ‘miracle’ solutions, the article attempts to highlight the inherent narrative character of the educational reform movement in the United States and its perpetual willingness to ignore previous structural failures in search of new solutions which typically mirror previous innovations in their fictive type.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.313 · 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