MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136191177 · doi:10.1177/00224669070410010401

Charter School Statutes and Special Education

2007· article· en· W2136191177 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

VenueThe Journal of Special Education · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterStatuteLegislatureSpecial educationPolitical scienceState (computer science)State responsibilityPublic administrationStatutory lawLawPublic relationsHuman rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Charter schools are a growing and evolving component of the public education sector. These schools may be exempt from state or local regulations, but they are part of the public system and subject to federal laws and many regulations. Research has documented policy tensions and basic challenges associated with developing special education programs in charter schools. A key source of these issues is ambiguity in individual state charter laws regarding roles and responsibilities related to special education. This article presents findings from a review of 41 charter statutes. The review reveals variability and lack of specificity among states in the legislative structures they maintain for charter schools and how responsibility for special education is assigned. These findings highlight the importance of federal, state, and district policy leaders developing a nuanced understanding of statutes shaping the parameters of responsibility for special education in the charter sector.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.231 · 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