MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W203103160

How Ontario Spread Successful Practices across 5,000 Schools: By Building and Supporting Networks of Educators throughout the Province, Ontario Was Able to Develop a System Now Highly Regarded for Both Equity and Excellence

2013· article· en· W203103160 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Avis Glaze

Bibliographic record

VenuePhi Delta Kappan · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellencePublic relationsBest practiceSociologyEquity (law)WindsorPedagogyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] There is such a range of rich professional learning opportunities that fuel a culture of collaboration among us. This investment by the Ontario Ministry of Education has nurtured meaningful dialogue about student achievement in our schools. It has fostered a contagious desire that helps us delve into deep conversations about teaching and learning. The networks that have been created challenge and stretch the boundaries of current pedagogical knowledge. We reflect on best practices and examine school-based data meticulously. We uncover the innovative practices that become the springboard to move student thinking forward. As this cycle continues, we become increasingly vested in unraveling further questions, hypotheses, and challenges while seeking out our colleagues to enrich their understandings as well ... It is through these empowering networks that we continue to share promising practices across schools and districts. --Susan Wright, elementary school teacher, Windsor, Ontario Before 2003, many would have said that the Ontario school system was in crisis. Today, the province has been recognized as one of the fastest-improving jurisdictions in the world. Ontario is lauded for achieving both excellence and equity, goals that many believe are mutually exclusive. One of the many lessons that Ontario learned is the importance of building capacity among teachers and principals to sustain strategies that work. When this happens, teachers are motivated, and they strive to do what they do best--educate all children, regardless of background or personal circumstances, to the maximum of their capabilities. During the years of its most intensive improvement work, Ontario educators could rely on support from the highest political levels of the province. Teachers' unions, and superintendents' and principals' associations also played a key role supporting the strategy by developing their members. I am convinced that systems do better when they take time nurturing trusting professional relationships with the individuals who are expected to do the daily work of implementation. Without the deep commitment of the adults, Ontario would never have been a success story. Ontario improvement strategy Although the success of the Ontario approach was driven by decisions initially made at the provincial level, the Ontario strategy included opportunities for negotiable variations and local adaptations. Providing for local adjustments based on achievement levels on literacy and numeracy, for example, demonstrated respect for the professional expertise of educators that is characteristic of the Ontario improvement strategy. Systems often waste time on too many priorities instead of targeting a few key areas for focused attention. In Ontario, we identified three main goals and provided professional learning to help districts identify a small number of SMART (Strategic and specific, Measurable, Attainable, Results-oriented, and Time-bound) goals to address larger provincial goals. That is where local decision making came into play, allowing professionals in each community to identify what would work best in their settings. Too often, when districts and schools engage in developing an improvement plan, they try to do too much, and the reality is that not much actually gets done (Glaze, Mattingley, & Andrews, 2013. p 29). Simply stated, the ministry's three main goals were to: * Improve student achievement; * Reduce gaps in student achievement; and * Improve public confidence in the public education system. The system redoubled its effort to achieve the specific goal to ensure that 75% of 12-year-olds reach the provincial standard of B or 70% within the specified time. At the secondary level, the intention was to raise graduation rates so that 85% of students would graduate from high school--up from 68%. …

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0400.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhi Delta KappanSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207