MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134925522 · doi:10.1177/1741143209334579

Struggling for Democracy

2009· article· en· W2134925522 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Management Administration & Leadership · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Christian Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyBureaucracyPublic relationsContext (archaeology)Work (physics)Vulnerability (computing)Power (physics)SociologyOrder (exchange)PedagogyPower structureParticipative decision-makingPolitical scienceEthnographyBusinessEngineeringPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a study that explores efforts to promote democratic practice in a diverse school context. More specifically, it documents administrative endeavors to include members of the school community—teachers, parents and students—in the various school processes by encouraging inclusive communicative practices. The findings of the study indicate that administrators attempt to achieve such ends by establishing relationships with members of their school community that will enable dialogue. They do their best to display their caring natures, vulnerability and senses of humor. They also make themselves visible and approachable, work on greeting people, understanding them and dismantling the hierarchies that exclude people. In the end, however, their efforts fail to foster meaningful democratic and inclusive practices. Administrators in the study end up bypassing democratic options and drawing on the hierarchical power associated with the bureaucratic system in which they work in order to ensure that the school will be able to attract students in the quasi-market system in which it operates.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.270
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.166 · 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