MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899617115

School Closure Decision-Making Processes: Problems and Prospects

2012· article· en· W2899617115 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Education Environments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosure (psychology)Mathematics educationMathematicsPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the issue of the permanent closures of public schools in Ontario. School closure processes are highly (and bitterly) contested, rife with conflict, and with few exceptions, harshly criticized by school and community stakeholders who see closures as a loss of irreplaceable social infrastructure. There is a need for a more nuanced planning style that acknowledges the realities of politics, unequal power relations and the validity of community residents' needs and values.To better understand the consequences of school closures upon communities, the authors evaluate the historical and current school closure decision-making process in Ontario. This entails a four part approach: understanding the role that schools play and the impacts of closure, especially on inner-city communities; examining the reasons for closures; exploring the closure process itself, comparing and contrasting process intent with application experiences; and, identifying alternatives to existing school-closures decision-making processes and framework.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.271 · 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