Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation seeks to present a consideration of some of the ways in which models of authority have been applied to Ontario's system of public education, need still to be changed. It contends three things. First, it states that the sociocultural realities of contemporary life profoundly affect the ways in which people relate to institutions such as school systems, and in turn the way school systems are able to govern themselves and the students for which they are responsible. Second, it observes that public education in Ontario has had a long history of broadly based liberal control, which has traditionally functioned using various versions of a centre-to-periphery pattern, now much more rigidly understood in narrowly economic terms. Third, it argues that although many changes have been made to facilitate student learning at each stage of the development of Ontario's public school system, the current ideologically-limited version of the model of authority used in its governance is even less able to maintain the system's relevancy in the face of the pressure brought to bear on it by (post-modern) life. A new dialogue must be established concerning what authority means in contingent terms for schools, starting from the basic classroom relationships between teachers and students, if the system as a whole is to be changed. The dissertation presents a definition of authority that is primarily relational, yet fully functional at the level of language. Such a definition is needed to consider models of authority as they may be applied to the fluidity of contemporary reality, in which norms themselves often become cross-contextual sets of practices rather than being representative of universally-acknowledged “metanarratives”. On the way, the definition is compared and contrasted with three artificially (designated) periods of centralization in the governance of Ontario's school system. A consideration of the mandate for public education itself then follows, along with the means by which authority may be legitimated within it. The distance between present realities and those versions of centralized authority used to govern Ontario's schools at present are held up over against the definition of legitimate authority provided at the outset, in order to prove the need for change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".