MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020136211 · doi:10.1080/02680939.2011.587539

The evolution of accountability

2011· article· en· W2020136211 on OpenAlexaffabout
P. Taylor Webb

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Policy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Educational Policies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernmentalityAccountabilityGovernment (linguistics)Power (physics)SociologyPublic administrationArticulation (sociology)DisciplineControl (management)Neoliberalism (international relations)DemocracyConstellationCentralized governmentPolitical sciencePolitical economySocial scienceLawManagementEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Campus 2020: Thinking ahead is a policy in British Columbia (BC), Canada, that attempted to hold universities accountable to performance. Within, I demonstrate how this Canadian articulation of educational accountability intended to develop governmentality constellations to control the university and regulate its knowledge output. This research illustrates how power in education is evolving from a disciplinary form, as expressed in the term governmentality, and toward a form of networked power in the form of societies of control. I pursue my analysis by juxtaposing sections of the government report with sections from Gilles Deleuze’s Postscript on the Societies of Control. The synthesis from these two texts demonstrates how BC’s provincial government intended to develop a network of governmentality constellations which would have maintained and exercised power through macro- and micro-surveillance technologies. In conclusion, I argue that BC wanted to assemble its new accountability machine and finally participate in the neoliberal democratic network of educational surveillance in Canada, and eventually, the world.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.045
Scholarly communication0.0170.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 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

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education PolicySame topicGlobal Educational Policies and ReformsFrench-language works237,207