MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7011298095

Lyn Tett and Mary Hamilton (eds) (2019) Resisting Neoliberalism in Education: Local, National and Transnational Perspectives

2021· other· en· W7011298095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeoliberalism (international relations)IdeologyEmployabilityState (computer science)Everyday lifeLiteracyForegroundingTheme (computing)Adult education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this edited collection from Tett and Hamilton, the authors explore the pervasive nature of neoliberalism within a range of educational contexts, including compulsory, adult and higher education. The need to resist dominant ideology, which puts profit over people, is a key theme throughout. Part One provides food for thought on ways to subvert dominant ideology within adult education. Chapter 1 (Thériault) examines the demands on community-based organisations in Quebec to undertake ‘accountability literacies’ (p.13) to prove their worth but highlights the resourcefulness of youth workers, who practise everyday resistance. I was left with a desire to read even more about the findings from this study, having personal experience of ‘conflictual cooperation’ as a youth worker funded by the state whilst challenging state demands on young people. Chapters 2 and 3 focus on adult education in England, examining adult literacy practice and policy. Duckworth and Smith (Chapter 2) propose that a discourse of transformation and hope constitutes natural resistance to the dominant expectations of ‘performative curricula’ (p.38). Allatt and Tett (Chapter 3) describe the approaches that adult literacy workers use to navigate ‘creative solutions’ (p.53) to meeting the demands set out by the discourse of employability skills that permeates policy and practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam)French-language works237,207