The badge and the baccalaureate: an analysis of attitudes and beliefs associated with policing and higher education in Ontario, from a management perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study utilized a cross-sectional, dual data collection methodology to solicit police management (command and senior officers') attitudes and beliefs towards five distinct vectors or quadrants associated with policing and higher education (Expectations, Relevance, Financial Rewards, Promotions and Resources). A quantitative e-mail survey, employing a 5-point Likert scale and an optional qualitative follow-up semi-structured interview method of inquiry were employed. The multistage data collection process utilized a combination of both probability and non-probability sampling techniques. Surveys ( n=100) were distributed to command senior officers within the five participating Greater Toronto Area police services—The Toronto Police Service, the Durham Regional Police Service, York Regional Police Service, Peel Regional Police Service and the Ontario Provincial Police. From the 82 survey respondents, 24 were interviewed. The survey and follow-up interview sought specifically to answer three research questions, associated to the aforementioned 5 Vectors. In addition three hypotheses arising from the five independent variables and the twenty-seven dependent survey items were also cross tabulated. Findings indicate that command and senior officers modally believe that, the current minimum entry level educational standard should not be raised, that some level of higher education is necessary to meet the future needs of policing, educational attainment and wages should not be linked and that current financial support for members pursing higher education is sufficient. It was also observed that police management felt that, promotions should not be linked to educational attainment; all command officers should have a minimum baccalaureate degree, it is too costly to fully subsidize higher education for all members, and that other expenditures take priority over funding higher education. Emerging from the study was also evidence of significant disparity in educational benefit policy across jurisdictions. Command and senior officers were surprisingly unaware of the magnitude of such disparity and its ramifications. An additional outgrowth of this research was to highlight the premium value placed upon pre-hire military experience by police management. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".