MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998230292 · doi:10.14507/epaa.v9n14.2001

Education Reform From An International Perspective

2001· article· en· W1998230292 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation Policy Analysis Archives · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Education and Schools
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaAmerican Educational Research Association
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Work (physics)PoliticsFrame (networking)Public administrationPolitical scienceEducation reformSociologyPublic relationsPedagogyPrimary educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A great deal of comparative work on education reform is now being done, but this work often lacks a clearly articulated conceptual frame. This paper, based on a study of change in five jurisdictions in four countries, develops a model of reform based on four interactive elements - origins, adoption, implementation, and outcomes. Within each of these elements, questions and concepts from the relevant literature are developed with the intent of building a more comprehensive approach to the analysis of reform from political, organizational and educational perspectives.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.404 · 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