MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039212064 · doi:10.24908/eoe-ese-rse.v6i0.630

Information and communications technology: Plugging Ontario higher education into the knowledge society

2008· article· en· W2039212064 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jamie-Lynn Magnusson

Bibliographic record

VenueEncounters in Theory and History of Education · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyContext (archaeology)Information societyKnowledge societyHigher educationWelfarePolitical scienceKnowledge economyBusinessPublic sectorPublic relationsEconomic growthPublic administrationEconomicsEconomyMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article I examine information and communications technology (ICT) in the context of changes to higher education. My analysis uses Ontario as a case study to illustrate that ICT and the knowledge society discourse is not about technological innovation per se. Rather the discourse legitimates neoliberal reforms to the higher education sector to lay the ground for participation in international markets. That is, these reforms enable privatization of higher education in keeping with pressures exerted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS). The case of Ontario is interesting because of the strategies used to "sell” massive neoliberal reforms to a public that has been, generally speaking, quite protective of its public services. The strategies and mechanisms used to "plug Ontario into the Knowledge Society" reveal how GATS works in local jurisdictions, and contributes to the study of how education within social welfare states comes to take on market characteristics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncounters in Theory and History of EducationSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207