MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7106147485 · doi:10.14288/ce.v16i4.187054

The Future of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) in Education

2024· article· en· W7106147485 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit (Université de Montréal) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Transformative learningCurriculumPoliticsPolitical correctnessBest practice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, also known as EDI, is one of several acronyms that refer to policies and practices of organizations, such as K to 12 school boards and post-secondary institutions, to promote inclusive and equitable environments. While EDI has become a ubiquitous discourse in educational administration, its impact extends into classroom pedagogies, hiring practices, curriculum development, and institutional culture. In this article, we critically examine the extent to which EDI committees and initiatives fulfil their promise of fostering inclusive environments to support equity-denied groups. We address the following research questions: (1) How have EDI frameworks evolved in education? (2) What gaps exist between EDI policies and their implementation for transformative impact? (3) What alternative approaches can create sustainable and impactful change? Overall, the article casts a critical eye on EDI initiatives, exploring opportunities, challenges, and potential futurities considering the polarizing discourse of political correctness and anti-wokeness.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0170.111
Scholarly communication0.0240.021
Open science0.0020.022
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit (Université de Montréal)→Same topicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies→French-language works237,207→