MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248503179 · doi:10.5430/jct.v8n3p102

A Second-Class Workforce: How Neoliberal Policies and Reforms Undermined the Educational Profession

2019· article· en· W4248503179 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunni Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyNeoliberalism (international relations)WorkforcePovertyPolitical scienceSociologyPublic administrationPublic relationsPedagogySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Years of professional neglect, scrutiny, and inequitable pay have forced educators across the country to fight forimproved policies and reforms. A public, in some circles, that views educators undeserving of their salaries due to theunpreparedness of the American youth to succeed in the economy and the continued societal problems emanating fromthe profession.Neoliberalism, as a school policy plan, was designed to retool and establish improved schooling opportunities,especially for children of color located in poor residential environments. Instead, what it created was a more divided,tiered school arrangement that expelled black-and-brown teachers from education while closing down the schools theyworked in primarily situated in urban America (Lipman, 1998; Watkins, 2011; Apple, 2018).The methodology for this research diagnosed and assessed key aspects of contemporary literature along with applyingan auto-ethnographic lens to evaluate school reform challenges. The critical race theoretical approach was adopted toindicate how neoliberalism affects new teachers entering the profession along with teachers and children of colorexisting within school structures.Despite the paper identifying the various milestones achieved in the newly constructed schools, it is also clear thatcharter-and-contract school designs pay teachers less for their work, reduces the employment attrition rate, andconsummates an over testing industry that regulates and controls how teachers instruct and are evaluated. Moretroubling, fewer people were interested in pursuing this profession as a career (Walker, 2019; Ravitch, 2016).To fix this challenge, educators are in the streets, the school board rooms, and on Capitol Hill to demand theirprofession receive the types of reforms necessary to sustain its existence. Such activism ensures education willcontinue to make great strides improving the lives of children, every day, while also working to sustain communities inneed of hope and progress.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207