MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381164017 · doi:10.32920/23541492.v1

Black youth disengaging from Ontario’s educational system : Grounded theory of their educational experiences

2023· preprint· en· W4381164017 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Travonne Edwards, Henry Parada

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisengagement theoryDiversity (politics)RacismGender studiesSociologyPerceptionGrounded theoryInclusion (mineral)PsychologySocial scienceQualitative researchGerontologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>[Introduction]: “Canadian school systems and institutions are faced with substantial issues of diversity, as there is a growing conscious realization that these systems and institutions are pervasive with issues of anti-Black racism (Dei, 1997; Ilmi, 2011; Sibblis, 2014; United Nations [UN] Working Group, 2016). Since the 1960s, there have been growing concerns about the many challenges experienced by Black and other minority students in schools in Ontario, Canada (Dei, 2008; James & Turner, 2017; Ruck & Wortley, 2002). For example, racialized students have been labelled with learning disabilities, streamlined into primary and general classes, and shown to experience high levels of disengagement and dropout (James & Turner, 2017; Dei, 2008; McMurtry & Curling, 2008; Anti-Racism Directorate, 2017). Presently, school engagement for young Black people remains a concern (UN Working Group, 2016). This chapter explores the experiences of Black Caribbean students navigating the Ontario educational sector. Our research aims to understand various forms of disciplinary action used against Black young people and how this influences their educational engagement and perceptions.”</p>

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation Discipline and InequalityFrench-language works237,207