MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106510473 · doi:10.1177/1097184x14551278

Teaching about “Princess Boys” or Not

2014· article· en· W2106510473 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne Martino, W. Cumming-Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueMen and Masculinities · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Studies in Language
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderPersonhoodQueerSociologyQueer theoryGender studiesContext (archaeology)Identity (music)PoliticsReading (process)PerformativityFeminismGender identitySexual identityEpistemologyHuman sexualityAestheticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we deal with the politics of gender embodiment and the significance of queer sociological and transgender theoretical perspectives for reflecting on the pedagogical implications of employing texts such as “My princess boy” to address questions pertaining to the livability and recognizability of differently gendered identities in the elementary school context. We draw specifically on the theoretical work of Judith Butler and Deborah Britzman to examine important questions related to the pedagogical implications for one male teacher in terms of what counts as a viable, recognizable, and legitimate gendered identity. Through adopting a case study approach, our purpose is to unravel and unpack the politics of gender embodiment, especially in terms of addressing the thinkability and admissibility of gender variant and transgender personhood in the elementary school classroom and what this might entail with regard to deploying reading practices as sites of identificatory possibilities or not.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMen and MasculinitiesSame topicGender Studies in LanguageFrench-language works237,207