Rethinking Community Within the Context of Social Inclusion as Social Justice: Implications for Women After Federal Incarceration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Very little is known about how women’s experiences with inclusion or exclusion shape their entry into community after they have been incarcerated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine inclusion from the perspective of women entering community after release from a federal prison in Ontario, Canada. This research project combined feminist participatory action research with anti-oppressive theories. Women who had been incarcerated were asked to come together to discuss ideas around inclusion and explore ways to foster a more inclusive environment. As women described the kind of community they experienced before and after incarceration, themes of being pushed out of community, being pulled into community, and negotiating issues of responsibility were evident. At the core of these themes was a powerful sense of difference. Findings suggest that deep societal change is needed for women to truly experience social inclusion upon their release from federal prison. They also suggest a role for community in supporting personal change and growth. We argue that if principles of social justice guided inclusion efforts, there would be dialogue and negotiation aimed at re-imagining social inclusion and creating a space that is hopeful and inclusive for all citizens.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.051 | 0.055 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".