Training Local Elected Officials: Professionalization Amid Tensions Between
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last few decades, several administrations in Canada have organized programs for training local elected officials (LEOs). While improving LEOs’ competences is beneficial, this trend is developing amidst a persisting tension between democratic and technocratic approaches to governance. Indeed, training - and the professionalization it entails - disrupts the enduring principle holding that everyone is equally authorized to govern following the democratic election. Despite the significance of these transformations, training activities for LEOs have received limited scholarly attention until now. In this paper, we detail our conceptualization of the professionalization process and the role of training programs within it. We then review the existing Canadian training programs for LEOs. We also examine one case study: the main introductory training program for LEOs in Québec (Canada) since 2011. Accordingly, we advance our understanding of training’s effects on elected officials by emphasizing how they contribute to a long-term process of professionalization.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it