Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined various aspects of school board-public conflict in British Columbia, including the relationships among board operating procedures, the demographic nature of communities, and conflict; issues that lead to conflict; and the intensity of conflict. The study also examined the relationships between community demography and board operating procedures. Board operating procedures were determined by examining the public minutes of all British Columbia school board meetings held during a one year period. Twenty-seven boards, representing a range of procedures, were selected as a sample. Community demographic characteristics were described in terms of heterogeneity, property assessments, and district size. Conflict was measured by means of a questionnaire to board members and district officials. It was found that British Columbia school boards exhibit a wide range of operating procedures, with boards in large districts tending to have less formal contact with the public during board meetings than do boards in smaller districts. The amount of board-public conflict increases as district size increases and is greater in more heterogeneous districts. Conflicts concerning pupil welfare are apt to be intense. Large urban districts experience greater conflict over matters concerning physical plant and instruction than do smaller rural districts. Boards in heterogeneous communities tend to have less conflict with the public if they increase direct contact with the public through public board meetings. Heterogeneity is more closely related to conflict than is district size.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".