MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EXAMINING THE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF LGBTQ STEM MAJORS

2017· article· en· W2772115465 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianTransgenderQueerContext (archaeology)HomosexualityPsychologyPedagogySociologyGender studiesGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study, drawn from a subset of qualitative data from the National Study of LGBTQ Student Success, explores the ecological systems [Bronfenbrenner, U., ed., Making Human Beings Human: Bioecological Perspectives on Human Development, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005] of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer-identified (LGBTQ) students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. Through open and axial coding of students' interview transcripts, we identified three primary themes: (1) LGBTQ students experience multiple STEM microsystems influenced by faculty, peers, and colleagues; (2) social science and humanities academic microsystems are perceived as safe places for LGBTQ students to be out; and (3) students' LGBTQ identities are central to their higher education experiences and influence peer microsystems in the context of exo- and macrosystem forces. Students' narratives demonstrate how LGBTQ STEM students experience their collegiate ecological systems and illuminate implications for practice and research.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.289 · 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