MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610268065

School Reform Policy in Newfoundland and Labrador in the 1990s: AN Analysis of Potential Impacts on Conditions for Learning

2001· article· en· W2610268065 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Victor G. Kendall

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitalCommons (California Polytechnic State University) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolicy analysisPolitical scienceGeographyPublic administration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 1990s, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador enacted education reform legislation. As with school reform in general, these statutes sought to establish principles for restructuring and conditions for improving learning for every child in the province. However, research indicates that many reform strategies fail to improve student achievement significantly, if at all (Newmann & Wehlage, 1995). This study examined the potential of the province’s laws for improving the quality of teaching and learning. Specific questions were: 1) how frequent and in what patterns are instructional components and enabling strategies embedded in education statutes and regulations? 2) are these instruments organized according to essential elements of policy to improve the quality of teaching and learning? 3) what do the frequency, pattern and level of policy support of instructional components embedded in the legislation mean for the likelihood of improving teaching and learning? These questions were addressed by using the literature to design and structure a content analysis of the current legislation to surface the patterns of instructional components and enabling strategies that positively affect teaching and learning and key elements of policy that are critical for implementation. The components and strategies were: content standards, student assessments, professional development, policy alignment, curricular materials, accountability and restructured governance. The policy elements were: goals, financial resources, supporting rules and implementation structures. The study found that instructional components were not embedded in legislation in a way that would improve achievement in schools. The statutory language focused mostly on governance. Moreover, instructional components were implicitly expressed and embedded in the duties of local administrators or school councils. Schools and boards were left with the responsibility of improving the quality of student learning but with few supporting rules and no direct financial support or implementation structures. Under such circumstances, it is unlikely that student achievement will improve. These findings will expose ways that statutes in education can and cannot be designed to affect policy implementation at the local level, help provincial policymakers reflect on the goals and potential impact of reform, and establish new directions that can help the province to improve student achievement.

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 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 score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.314
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigitalCommons (California Polytechnic State University)Same topicEducational Practices and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207