MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776073753 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v25i1.462

Financial Literacy and Academics: A Critical Discourse Analysis

2012· article· en· W2776073753 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Leona M. English

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial literacyGovernment (linguistics)Critical discourse analysisAffect (linguistics)Discourse analysisPower (physics)LiteracySociologyPublic relationsPedagogyPolitical scienceBusinessFinancePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Using a critical discourse analysis (CDA), we explore the experience of adult education and business academics educating new parents for financial literacy. Informed by poststructuralism, CDA helps to examine the social relations of power operating in knowledge dissemination processes, especially as they affect adult educators, accountants, community partners, new parents, funding agencies, and government. We analyze our own engagement in this financial program, highlighting our complicities and resistances, especially the ways in which we wittingly and knowingly become academic lackeys for our government.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.428 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207