MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409425914 · doi:10.53967/cje-rce.6975

Outsourcing Mental Health Programs: Harms to Public Education and to Students

2025· article· en· W4409425914 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Melanie D. Janzen, Christine Mayor, Hafizat Sanni-Anibire

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutsourcingMental healthMedical educationPsychologyBusinessPublic healthPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicineNursingPsychiatryMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Students are experiencing high levels of stress and mental health distress and are at greater risk of suicide, resulting in calls to provide appropriate mental health supports in schools. In response, provincial governments are outsourcing K–12 mental health supports to private organizations (both non- and for-profit). Through a review of Manitoba education documents, we traced over 50 private organizations recommended by the provincial government and over $8.9 million of public money spent on these programs. Situated within the broader neo-liberal trend of the privatization of public education, we then used a critical policy analysis approach to analyze these programs’ content, explicating the ways in which these outsourced programs endorse the deprofessionalization of the teacher and the self-responsibilization of students while enlisting problematic content. We argue that outsourcing ultimately undermines education as a public good and recommend holding governments accountable, developing research-informed mental health supports, and implementing a critical assessment process when considering outsourcing to private organizations.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation→Same topicChild and Adolescent Health→French-language works237,207→