MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191184957 · doi:10.1075/aral.38.3.01cum

Identities in motion

2015· article· en· W2191184957 on OpenAlexaff
Jim Cummins

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Review of Applied Linguistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationMotion (physics)Construct (python library)ScholarshipContext (archaeology)Identity (music)SociologyField (mathematics)Space (punctuation)Process (computing)Core (optical fiber)Focus (optics)Identity negotiationIsolation (microbiology)EpistemologyLinguisticsComputer scienceSocial sciencePolitical scienceAestheticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent scholarship within the field of applied linguistics highlights the fact that identities are not static but are fluid, multiple, changeable across time and space, and always constructed in relationship to interactions with others. In other words, identities are constantly in motion. This paper presents a framework for examining the notion of ‘identities in motion’ as a core analytic construct in understanding patterns of educational success and failure. This framework is contrasted with the implicit frameworks that have operated in many countries that consign notions of identity negotiation to the margins and focus on ‘educational effectiveness’ as a process of instructional and organisational efficiency in isolation from the historical and current social context.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.048
Scholarly communication0.0100.018
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Review of Applied LinguisticsSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207