MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011781980 · doi:10.1017/s000842391100076x

A Focusing Tragedy: Public Policy and the Establishment of Afrocentric Education in Toronto

2011· article· en· W2011781980 on OpenAlexaffabout
Debra Thompson, Jennifer Wallner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTragedy (event)HumanitiesPolitical scienceExtant taxonSociologyArtSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In January 2008, the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) voted to establish Afrocentric education. Earlier proposals dating back to the early 1990s, however, garnered little response from the board. Why was the TDSB suddenly more amenable to the idea? We argue that the death of Jordan Manners acted as a focusing event that triggered concern regarding school safety and the challenges facing Black youth in Toronto, altering the policy climate and opening a window of opportunity for change. This analysis furthers conceptualizations of the connections between focusing events, policy entrepreneurs, the viability of alternative proposals, and the catalysts that facilitate policy change. Résumé. En janvier 2008, le Conseil Scolaire du District de Toronto (CSDT) a voté en faveur de l'établissement d'un programme d'éducation afro-centrée. Des propositions précédentes remontant au début des années 1990 avaient suscité peu d'intérêt de la part du Conseil. Pourquoi le CSDT s'est-il soudainement montré réceptif à cette idée? Nous considérons que le décès de Jordan Manners a servi d'épisode marquant qui a suscité de fortes préoccupations quant à la sécurité à l'école et aux défis auxquels font face les jeunes noirs à Toronto. Cet évènement marquant a contribué à modifier le climat politique et à ouvrir une fenêtre d'opportunité propice au changement. Cette analyse conceptualise de plus les liens entre épisodes marquants, entrepreneurs politiques, la viabilité de différentes propositions et les catalyseurs qui facilitent le changement politique.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207