Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is much fear in the world and we must attend to it directly if we are to be relevant to the human condition. Participatory action research (PAR) is equipped to take up the challenge presented by this fear by drawing upon a rich liberatory tradition in the adult education movement, a passionate commitment to equality and justice, and the practical skills to investigate reality in order to transform it. As an adult educator, I have found a natural fit between PAR and my understanding of the community development concept as a guide for creating community as a space for mutuality and freedom; an inclusive and safe place, as a sanctuary in times of alienation and fear. For me, PAR is a form of resistance to all forms of control limiting ourfreedom to pursue a reasoned, compassionate, committed and democratic knowledge base. It can be an antidote to oppressive forces. This is in keeping with our liberatory tradition in the adult education movement which provided fertile ground for PAR. How do these radical variations play out in the notoriously conservative province of Alberta? How can a practitioner acquire the confidence and courage to act upon the hope of PAR?
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 | 0.153 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.219 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.028 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".