School Reforms in Ontario: The "Marketization of Education" and the Resulting Silence on Equity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Market dynamics have begun to entrench themselves in educational systems around the world. Although this phenomenon has been addressed in several recent writings (Ball, 1993; Dehli, 1996; Gerwitz, Ball, & Bowe, 1995; Kenway, 1993; Robertson, 1995), few have incorporated a critical antiracist framework. As noted by Dehli (1996) the encroachment of market forms, relations, and concepts into educational sites usually results in the marginalization and muting of other dimensions of schooling. Using an integrative antiracist perspective that is informed by the findings of an ongoing study of inclusive schooling in Ontario (Dei et al, 1996), this article critically examines these ongoing reforms in a Canadian context, specifically in relation to the recent reforms in Ontario's educational system. We draw on knowledge about race and difference to argue for serious questioning of these reforms and their impact on socially disadvantaged groups. In doing so, the article asserts that current trends are leading toward the " Marketisation of education" (Ball, 1993; Gerwitz et al., 1995; Kenway, 1993) in Ontario, and that the harmful consequences of this shift will be felt most severely in relation to issues of equity and access in education. Through the rhetoric of cost-effectiveness and bureaucratic efficiency, the "official" agenda for educational change shifts focus away from equity considerations in schooling to those of capital, market forces, and big business. The article interrogates the rhetoric of reform and calls for equity to be placed at the centre of educational change. In conclusion we suggest new ways of examining and addressing genuine educational options in Canadian contexts.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".