MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gender Mainstreaming in a Development Project: Intersectionality in a Post‐Colonial Un‐doing?

2009· article· en· W2039828472 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueGender Work and Organization · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismHegemonyIntersectionalityGender mainstreamingSociologyGender studiesMainstreamingEquity (law)DecolonizationPolitical sciencePoliticsLawGender equalityPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores some critical reflections engaged in as part of the earliest stages of applying for an international development project grant. Though most of the funding came from the North, which had the potential to reproduce typical North–South relations, both parties involved in the project agreed to predicate relationships on principles of equity in an attempt to decolonize relationships, or what could be seen as a sort of ‘un‐doing’ of traditional colonial relations. Tensions emanating from within and among the teams at early meetings underscored the complexity of un‐doing colonial relationships, as well as the way that colonial relations awkwardly but seamlessly intersect with gendered, classed and heteronormative individual and organizational relations. It also highlights the messiness and difficulty in transform(ing) hegemonic social conditions in a single international institution or project.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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