Neoliberal Elements in Canadian Teacher Education: Challenges and Possibilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article offers a critical reflection of the changes experienced in teacher education across Canada in light of the neoliberal impact on educational spaces. It also seeks to disrupt the neoliberal narrative and problematize a rationality that has permeated teacher education programs. The article maintains that the neoliberal agenda is incompatible with critical educational practices. As a mode of critical resistance to educational instrumentalism, the paper offers recommendations as part of its critique on the deleterious impact of neoliberalism. Cet article offre une réflexion critique des changements découlant de l’impact néolibéral sur les milieux éducatifs qui touchent la formation des enseignants partout au Canada. L’article veut également perturber la théorie néolibérale et problématiser une rationalité qui s’est infiltrée dans les programmes de formation des enseignants. L’article affirme que le programme néolibéral est incompatible avec des pratiques éducatives cruciales. Comme élément de sa critique de l’impact néfaste du néolibéralisme, l’article propose des recommandations en guise de moyens de résistance critique à l’instrumentalisme en éducation. Mots clés : néolibéralisme, formation des enseignants justice sociale, instrumentalisme
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".