MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009622743

Exposing Neoliberalism's Erosion of Special Education in Ontario Schools

2023· article· en· W7009622743 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBureaucracyAccountabilityTheory of changeTransformational leadershipLeadership studiesOrganizational changeTransformative learningFraming (construction)Context (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My positionality as a critical scholar frames the problem of practice. The POP discusses a lack of transparency stemming from a longstanding hierarchy of influence from the ministry of education to local school boards and then to individual schools. A political, economic and social analysis frames the organizational context which impacts my role and agency within the organization. The organization’s worldview, tied to the ministry’s worldview, undermines student experience, as does both organization’s leadership approach. Using a critical bureaucracy and anti-oppressive theory, this organizational improvement plan investigates the physical and bureaucratic barriers that undermine special education student experience. Critical theory supports the leadership approach to change due to my agency. There is a tethering of neoliberalism, bureaucracy, and ableism that all intersect in this organizational improvement plan. The framework for leading the change process uses the zone of mediation as a framework for change. The leadership and humility change model is used to propel change as it aligns with the theoretical framing of this organization improvement plan. This organizational improvement plan uses an adapted community analysis model to assess readiness for change. Three options to address solutions to the POP are investigated with a preferred solution, an equity audit, selected. As a change facilitator, the support for change will be explored through servant, transformative and advocacy leadership theories. The change implementation plan uses a spiral of inquiry to monitor the change process, and communicating the change process occurs through tailoring messages to the various audience, aligning with the servant-leadership approach.\nKeywords: neoliberalism, critical bureaucracy theory, anti-oppressive theory, leadership and humility change model, servant-leadership, transformational-leadership, advocacy-leadership, special education

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0330.024
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.160 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies→French-language works237,207→