MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1566286377 · doi:10.25071/1916-4467.36551

Fishing for difference: A case study of singularity and sensibility in critical literary life writing

2013· article· en· W1566286377 on OpenAlex
Claire Robson, Dennis Sumara

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicOral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgarySimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeSensibilityIdentity (music)EPICSociologyLife writingNegotiationAestheticsAgency (philosophy)Gender studiesLiteratureArtSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper draws upon a two-year study that examined how critical literary life writing helped a group of lesbian seniors negotiate identity. As we consider the notions of difference and singularity, building upon the earlier work of one of the authors, we analyze the work of one participant - an ex nun whose life’s work has made her remarkable in the eyes of the world. However, as oral historians (Portelli, 1981; Thompson, 2009) have found, epic stories of celebration and achievement can serve to limit the scope of life narratives. This can hold especially true for marginalized individuals (Boyd, 2008). We suggest that in this instance, structured practices of close writing opened up our participant’s narrative to lyric possibility, rather than the “grammars of consequence” (Zwicky, 2006).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.253 · 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