An investigation into a role for municipal planners in decisions pertaining to the future of surplus schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In addition to facilitating the education of children, school buildings and their surrounding footprint offer a wide range of community benefits. Consequently, when student enrolment falls and these buildings are slated for closure, the public benefits that these facilities provide are lost to the surrounding neighbourhood. Currently in Ontario, the mandate for school boards when closing surplus schools appears to be detached from that of the corresponding municipality. This MRP explores what is preventing these two entities from working together presently, and subsequently hypothesizes the role of a legislated partnership between municipalities and school boards when decisions are being made about the future of these sites. Not only would a more collaborative relationship between municipalities and school boards be beneficial in evaluating the potential for joint or alternative uses for school sites, but it would also afford an opportunity for municipal planners to study the intangible benefits of a school and the impact of closures on Official Plan policy objectives. The potential role for municipal planners in the school closure decision-making process will therefore be central to the findings of this paper.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".