MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186069610 · doi:10.59236/td2014vol7iss31201

Some reflections on improving accessibility and the classroom experience

2014· article· en· W2186069610 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransformative Dialogues Teaching and Learning Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSubtitles and Audiovisual Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityWork (physics)Government (linguistics)PedagogySociologyPsychologyEngineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper offers reflections on experiences with accessibility, inclusivity and visual impairments in the classroom at the University of Guelph, in Guelph, Ontario, Canada.We draw on the example of improving the accessibility of an Anthropology poster conference assignment, incorporating the personal reflections of a disabled student and an abled professor.In doing so, we discuss how communication and creativity can improve classroom accessibility and inclusivity.Our experiences demonstrate that ensuring accessibility in university settings requires not just government and institutional mandates, but also the encouragement and support to think creatively about ways that individuals can work to make the classroom experience more inclusive.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.254 · 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