Recording action research in a classroom: singing with chickadees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a collective interpretive record of a graduate course in Social Work on participatory action research (PAR) offered during the winter of 2007. It is written by 14 individuals including the instructor. It was inspired by the image of a chickadee bird borrowed from Jonathan Lear’s (2006 Lear, J. 2006. Radical hope, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]) book Radical Hope. The chickadee is a powerful metaphor for aboriginal peoples of Western Canada as she thrives in the bitter winters despite her tiny frame. She does so because she is gifted with deep listening in her environment wherein lies all she needs to know. The class of 14 met in a circle, read articles, kept learning journals, argued, ate together, practised popular education techniques and presented our emerging knowledge in multi‐media forms. We related our experience to recent articles in EAR and to other PAR literature. The chickadee facilitated our deep listening to writings and to our own stories. Collective power emerged from our relationships and our diversity.
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 | 0.015 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".