A Pilot Project on Inclusivity: The Case of the Master of Education Program in Educational Administration at The University of Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper focuses on experiences and developments in one of the volunteer sites of the Inclusive Curriculum Project initiated in June 1993 by the University of Manitoba in volunteer departments and faculties. It deals with the Masters program in Educational Administration in the Department of Educational Administration and Foundations. It opens with an historical background of the debate framing universities' proposals for change and historizing the understanding of academic freedom in relation to equity and inclusivity. In fact, the process generated by the project was by and large conditioned by the dominant set of assumptions about rights, freedom/autonomy. The paper conceptualizes the various responses to the challenges of inclusivity that the Educational Administration group as a whole or as individuals had articulated over time and examined how perceptions and meaning were created, developed and challenged through the dialogue and interventions that took place during the project. In describing the process, the group's concern with evidence is analyzed along with the results of the student survey, and the role of the external "reviewer." It concludes with an account of what was achieved and the thoughts about the politics of the process that was illustrative of the difficulties involved in questioning one's own academic practices and in unveiling relations of power, disentangling one's own system of ideas.
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 | 0.020 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.044 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| 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".