MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550288859 · doi:10.1017/cls.2016.11

“Not Bad Kids, Just Bad Choices”: Governing School Safety Through Choice

2016· article· en· W2550288859 on OpenAlex
Zachary Levinsky

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et Société · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsSGS (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZero toleranceReputationNegotiationSchool choiceInstitutionDemocracyDemocratic idealsFunction (biology)Zero (linguistics)Public relationsPolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using the Safe Schools Act in Ontario as an example of a school zero-tolerance policy, I demonstrate that there are more implications for governing students through these policies than the literature tends to suggest. The push to exclude students found in zero-tolerance policies co-exists uneasily with the liberal democratic pull to an inclusive education. Principals negotiate the contradictory positioning of students as simultaneously excludable and includable uniquely. There is also an insertion of ‘choice’ as a strategy to resolve these tensions. Inappropriate conduct conceived as the students’ choice signals a reorientation of the main function of the school, to an institution now interested in managing its own reputation by devolving the responsibility of good behaviour onto the student.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.291 · 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