MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990236640 · doi:10.22215/cjcr.v6i1.2336

“Help Them Back Home”: Italian Fantasies of (Neoliberal) Inclusion from Buona Scuola to Salvini’s Government

2019· article· en· W2990236640 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Valentina Migliarini

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfants · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)SociologySolidarityContext (archaeology)Gender studiesNeoliberalism (international relations)Political scienceSocial sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores how inclusive education in the Italian context has shifted from the Marxist model based on the solidarity of Integrazione Scolastica (see D’Alessio, 2011) to a neoliberal approach which targets Black migrant and forced-migrant children. The introduction of Renzi’s policy reform, Buona Scuola, marked this shift towards neoliberal inclusion, and the current far-right government, led by Salvini, adds a populist character to it, evident in his mantra of “helping them back home”. Drawing from Butler’s (1997) notions of subjectivation and referring to Tomlinson’s (1982) concept of benevolent humanitarianism, the paper analyzes how Italian educators conceptualize the inclusion of migrants and refugees through neoliberal fantasies. However, the space of neoliberal inclusion is ableist, racist, and exclusionary. Ultimately, the paper advances the intersectional approach of Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) to (re)frame educational and social inclusion in Italy and to refute a neoliberal model that perpetuates racial disparities (Annamma, Connor, Ferri, 2013; 2016).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfantsSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207