MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Soft Disability in Schools: Assisting or Confining At Risk Children and Youth?

2018· article· en· W201462257 on OpenAlexaff
Anastasios Karagiannis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of educational thought. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyAt-risk studentsSocial psychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim in this article is to examine the institutional construction of soft or mild disability by special education as a process of pre-incarceration in schools. Soft disability includes the categories of specific learning disabilities (LD), speech and language impairments (SLI), emotional and behavioural disorders (EBD), and mild mental retardation (MMR). Based on Foucault's (1975/1977) view of the link between prison and delinquency and Skrtic's (1995) critical-pragmatic perspective of disability and special education , I argue that labels of soft disability reflect a process of suspending the educational and citizenship participation of disadvantaged students. Similarly to what Foucault described as the production of delinquency by the prison, special education, by applying inconsistent identification criteria, increases the occurrence of soft disability. Variation and inquiry are outlined as alternative concepts whose implementation may r e verse the negative school dynamic between soft dis ability and (p r e) incarceration.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.353
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 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of educational thought.Same topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207