More than just a bus trip: School busing, disability and access to education in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with disabilities in Ontario, Canada have their right to equal access to education protected by the 1990 Ontario Human Rights Code and the 1990 Education Act. These legislated rights require the delivery of stigma- and barrier-free education services to children with disabilities. However, the extent to which compliance is achieved by school boards and individual schools is questionable and warrants attention as a matter of both scholarship and public policy. In this paper, we take up and apply the concept of excess travel (i.e., the travel beyond what would be required given a more optimal distribution of housing and schools) to examine the extent to which students with disability and their families are required to undertake longer, more time-consuming school trips. Our analysis includes students who were bused to TDSB elementary (grade school) and secondary (high school) schools. We use TDSB student busing records for the 2016–17 school year obtained in collaboration with the TDSB between December 2017 and March 2018. Our findings indicate substantial excess travel, particularly for students who are labelled as deaf, physically disabled, or having a behavioural exceptionality. Excess travel time experienced by students with disability is concerning given that it can lead to missed classroom time and may limit opportunities for peer interaction. The availability of busing services for students with disability confers access to education, yet it may paradoxically produce disabling experiences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".