MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766638139 · doi:10.14746/ikps.2015.10.11

Emancypacja poprzez edukację a perspektywa Konwencji o Prawach Osób Niepełnosprawnych

2015· article· pl· W2766638139 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInterdyscyplinarne Konteksty Pedagogiki Specjalnej · 2015
Typearticle
Languagepl
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolish Legal and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceConvention on the Rights of Persons with DisabilitiesMandateHuman rightsTreatyInclusion (mineral)Context (archaeology)EmpowermentRhetoricConventionEmancipationPublic administrationLawSociologyPoliticsGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is the eighth human rights convention enacted by the United Nations. Coming into force in 2008, it is the first international instrument specifically directed toward persons with disabilities. In its articulation of a clear and comprehensive mandate for the elimination of stig-ma and discrimination, it appeared to be a promising vehicle for the emancipation and empowerment of persons with disabilities. As of July 2015 there are 157 ratifica-tions, of which the great majority are developing countries. In this paper we exam-ine the CRPD within the context, and as part of, a larger and very significant global social-ideological orientation: the international movement for inclusive schooling. As inclusion is increasingly embraced around the world, it is important for educa-tors to understand how this major human rights convention is linked to and inter sects with the quest for inclusive schooling. Our analysis reveals that there are in-herent tensions and dialectical contradictions between the broad ideals of the inclusion movement and the more focused priorities of the CRPD. As a result, de-spite grand hopes and elaborate plans, progress of the CRPD has been disappoint-ing. The CRPD is not playing a significant role in inclusive policy making at any level. Very few nations have translated the principles into effective action. Indeed, few countries at present even have the capacity needed to ensure full implementa-tion of the treaty, and the international pattern documents a disconnect between emancipatory rhetoric and measurable outcomes. To date, it appears that the CRPD has done little to materially and educationally improve the prospects of those with disabilities.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.009

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.179 · 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