MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330171274 · doi:10.55016/ojs/ajer.v60i1.55787

Youth, Education, and Marginality: Local and Global Expressions (2013) Kate Tilleczek and H. Bruce Ferguson, editors

2014· article· en· W2330171274 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jeffrey R. Hankey

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyGender studiesMedia studiesPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This edited collection with contributions by scholars, educators, policy-makers, and notably, dozens of young people endeavours to cast a critical light on the nuances, complexities, and menacing subtleties of youth marginalization in "a moment of making space" (p. 2) for renewed alternatives and reinvigorated voices.The text is at once hopeful and heartbreaking, at times frustrating, even incredulous, but never lacking self-reflexivity and an appreciation for the myriad factors that serve to reproduce disparity and exclusion.Certain contributors quite justifiably point fingers (see King, Edwards, and Blackstock's scathing appraisal of the federal government's treatment of Aboriginal communities in Chapter 5), but more so the reader is encouraged to prepare for an interior journey of introspection and self-critique (see especially the self-incriminating tone of Smyth in Chapter 2).Several themes dance and mingle throughout the text.For instance, juxtaposition of disparate youth experiences is used to emphasize plural particularity over and above universal abstraction.This tactic effectively demonstrates the globally applicable threads of marginalization without relegating any individual or population to some holographic universal status, which collapses under the weight of its own particularity.Rummens and Dei portray this in simpler language in their exploration of racialized, immigrant, and Aboriginal youth: Important to note is that while marginalization trajectories may be unique both to specific individuals and different groups both within and over time, the overall processes of social exclusion are often very similar.The same is true of the attendant detrimental impacts and outcomes.(p.119)

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.375 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207