Research goes to the cinema: The veracity of videography <i>with, for</i> and <i>by</i> youth
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the use of participatory videography as a way of knowing and bearing witness to the complexity of young lives in educational research. We outline the principles for engaging young people in participatory videography. Working in the framework of humanities-infused praxis with, for, and by young people, we explore the place of visibility and invisibility. We identify what is gained, lost and unsettled in the use of video as a cultural process and production. We offer our theoretical and aesthetic considerations in relation to two projects. The first is a project about the youth mental health system in rural Canada, wherein we explore the fractured system visually through documentary filmmaking in the cinéma vérité cinema genre. The second is a project in which we are working with young Aboriginal Canadians who are framing the intersections of mental health and technology through filmmaking. We interrogate videography as a form of cultural production with the potential for engaging young people in educative experience, symbolic activity and cultural production. Youth videography offers opportunities for comparative education research in which social and cultural analyses are made visible. We explicate videography as a potentially meaningful experience for youth and for a deeper cultural analysis in educational research while addressing the tensions surrounding its claim to veracity.
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 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 | 0.018 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it