MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136598555 · doi:10.2190/05q8-587t-7x61-l4u4

Is Work in Education Child's Play? Understanding Risks to Educators Arising from Work Organization and Design of Work Spaces

2007· article· en· W2136598555 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

VenueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicErgonomics and Human Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)PsychosocialCitizen journalismPsychologyMedical educationPedagogyEngineeringMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The educational sector exposes its primarily female work force to numerous psychosocial risk factors. At the request of the education workers', ergonomists developed a participatory research project in order to understand the determinants of the difficulties experienced by special education technicians. These technicians work with students presenting behavioral and learning difficulties as well as developmental and mental health problems. Eighteen technicians were interviewed and the work of seven technicians and two teachers was observed. Technicians prevent and manage crisis situations and help students acquire social skills. Coordination with teachers is made difficult by the fact that most technicians work part time, part year, and many technicians' work areas and classrooms are physically distant one from another. Most technicians change schools each year and must continually reconstruct work teams. Management strategies and poorly adapted working spaces can have important repercussions on coordination among educators and on technicians' capacity to help students and prevent aggressive behavior.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.253 · 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