Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation investigates the ways that pathologization, deficit model thinking, and negative school labels (i.e., learning disabled, at-risk, problem behaviour) are given institutional life within the relationships between students, staff, administrators, and policy makers at various levels of the alternative education hierarchy in British Columbia, Canada. The research design is a narrative inquiry into a specific case, and methods employed to gather the interwoven stories of the case include interviews, program observation, document collection, and focus groups. Data was analyzed using a three-tiered process of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing and verification. Findings consist of a series of paradoxes in relationships operating on multiple levels of the alternative education system: between students and staff at an alternative program, and within the language and labels used by professionals working in managerial/administrative positions at the high school, alternative program, local school board, and provincial ministry of education. Educational professionals in the province are seen to accept and resist processes of youth marginalization, such as deficit model thinking and pathologization, within the alternative education system. These contradictions, suggested by Ivan Illich to be inherent to large, modern social institutions, imply deeper ideological problems within the educational endeavour and the society at large. Implications for the educational institution, educators and administrators, students, and alternative programs are discussed in the final chapter, along with suggestions for future research and conclusions about ‘promise’ for alternative education, educational professionals, and students.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".