Tensions in Creating Possibilities for Youth Voice in School Choice: An Ethnographer’s Reflexive Story of Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following article relates a reflexive ethnographic research project that focuses on youth voice in relation to the process of choosing a high school and a language of instruction in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this methodological article is to relate a story of research and explore the tensions between theory and practice experienced by a young researcher during and after fieldwork. To do so, I explore the theoretical and epistemological underpinnings of the relevance and importance of youth-centred research and uncover some of the complexities of conducting participant observation, interviews, and co-analysis activities with youth participants. Resume Cet article presente un projet de recherche ethnographique reflexif qui se concentre sur les perspectives des jeunes dans leur processus de selection d’une ecole secondaire et d’une langue d’enseignement dans la province Canadienne de l’Ontario. Le but de cet article methodologique est de raconter l’histoire d’un projet de recherche et d’explorer les tensions entre la theorie et la pratique vecue par une jeune chercheure pendant et apres le travail de terrain. Pour ce faire, j’explore les fondements theoriques et epistemologiques de la pertinence et de l’importance de la recherche centree sur les enfants, et de mettre en lumiere les complexites de l’observation participante, des entretiens et des activites de co-analyse de donnees avec les jeunes participants.
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 | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".