MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7035598532

Against Exclusion: Intellectual and Developmental Disability Policy in Canada

2023· dissertation· en· W7035598532 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityInclusion (mineral)TypologySocial exclusionSocial policyPopulationPolicy analysisPublic policyEmpirical research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within Canada, the social inclusion of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) is impeded by structural and social barriers borne from a legacy of systemic discrimination and policies of explicit exclusion. This exclusion is so ingrained that the realization of ‘full inclusion’ for this population significantly challenges dominant social and political norms. However, despite this challenge, for the past 25 years social inclusion has been at the forefront of the Canadian disability policy agenda. This dissertation poses two related research questions: (1) ‘how is social inclusion framed in the design and implementation of policies targeting people with IDD?’, and (2) ‘how do Canadian provinces differ in the effectiveness of social services that promote the social inclusion of people with IDD?’
\nThese questions are addressed in three phases. The first phase involves a Critical Frame Analysis of IDD policy designs within relevant federal and provincial policy documents, identifying six distinct design frames. In the second phase, IDD policy implementation processes are assessed for how they (re)frame social inclusion. Empirical support is drawn from interviews and focus groups with policy actors, advocates, and service users. While the complex nature of implementation (re)framing in IDD services confounds cross-provincial comparison, this dissertation introduces a novel typology for comparing implementation decisions. It demonstrates that policy effectiveness need not be confined to mechanisms of top-down accountability and can be achieved through empowering implementers to adhere to professional norms or service user preferences.
\nThis empirical analysis of social inclusion policy (re)framing develops a descriptive foundation to select and weight indicators used in the third phase: a multidimensional policy index. The Social Inclusion Services Index (SISI) comprises 10 indicators across 4 domains that capture the effectiveness of Canadian IDD policies in promoting social inclusion. The SISI offers insight into the finding that, despite widespread support for inclusive IDD policy, implementation has failed because of austere spending, stalled policy transitions and inflexible administrative structures, among other factors. Cross-provincial comparison, based on indicators reflecting priorities identified by study participants, highlights areas of emphasis to curtail policy failure in the promotion of social inclusion for Canadians with IDD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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 venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207