MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414595500 · doi:10.1080/17457823.2025.2556653

Marginality and exclusion: teachers’ involvement in the formulation of Ghana's Free Senior High School Policy

2025· article· en· W4414595500 on OpenAlex
Hilarius Kofi Kofinti

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnography & Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Educational Policies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Public policyAgency (philosophy)Work (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2017, the Government of Ghana introduced the Free Senior High School Policy (FSHSP) to universalise access to secondary education. Although this policy has received substantial attention from scholars, limited attention has been paid to the role of teachers in the policy formulation process. To fill this lacuna, I draw on an ethnography of three distinct schools to explore teachers’ views regarding their involvement in the policymaking process in Ghana and how teachers understand their role in policy formulation vis-à-vis the government. I argue that the government, seen as an all-powerful policy actor, excluded teachers from the policy formulation stage, yet teachers were charged with implementing the policy. Teachers attributed their marginalisation to the politicisation of education and the practice of policy borrowing. Teachers argued that their involvement and insight could have averted or mitigated implementation challenges. This paper contributes to understanding teachers’ marginalisation in the education policy process.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.332 · 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