MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205097550 · doi:10.46692/9781447361282.010

How do we deliver social justice through education?

2021· other· en· W4205097550 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial justiceEconomic JusticeSociologyBusinessPolitical scienceCriminologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

England and Wales have now had 150 years of state education. Various reforms since the Gladstone government's 1870 Act have undoubtedly transformed the life chances of millions of people. Yet, some aspects have changed little, the emphasis being still mainly academic, not vocational. Social mobility is possible but Gladstone's current successor is yet another old Etonian. Britain, especially England, is still a country where your life chances are set at birth. While being born privileged in Britain means that you are likely to remain privileged, if you are born disadvantaged, then you have to overcome a series of barriers to ensure that you and your children are not stuck in the same trap. The top echelons of British society are still viewed through a glass ceiling by most of us. Our education system must be the means to shatter it. We also have a sticky floor of underachievement holding back a stubbornly consistent fifth of our young people who fail to reach the minimum standards of literacy and numeracy essential to survive in the modern world. Again, our education system must be the means to allow people to rise. It is time for some real ‘levelling up’. To thrive in the next fifth of the 21st century, Britain will need a skilled workforce to attract investors away from our EU neighbours. We need our people to be flexible, creative and entrepreneurial. We must have the skills to design and develop world-beating products and services. Our education system and its outcomes must be changed in order to meet this challenge. According to education statistics produced by the OECD club of richer countries, Britain is just about inside the top third of its members on measurements of average literacy and numeracy scores. We are in the same cohort as the US, Japan and Sweden but we are far behind Canada, Korea and Poland, and other countries are likely to overtake us. Britain's average scores are held down by the bottom fifth of our young people, a tail of underachievers. Most but not all of them are from disadvantaged families. It is this group of people who are failed the most by our education system. The OECD found that 17 per cent of 15 year olds did not reach the Level 2 minimum standard of literacy, with 19 per cent failing to attain functional numeracy.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207