Educating 'Gangsters': Social space, informal learning and becoming 'Gang' involved
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research focuses on the previously neglected topic of how people are educated into groups commonly described as ‘gangs’; in particular, this thesis outlines the role that social space plays in such educative processes. This focus enables both a new contribution to knowledge in the field of ‘gang’ studies and understandings of the way social space is used, understood and perceived by those involved in ‘gangs’. Much research exists in the field of ‘gang’ studies spanning various disciplines and sub-fields. The existing literature on ‘gangs’ predominantly engages with typographies, definitions and prevention; the majority of which stems from a criminological perspective. There has been no direct attempt to explore the ways in which people are educated into ‘gangs’ thus far. Rather than begin from any predetermined assumptions, this research centred on people who have been involved with or affected by ‘gangs’ in order to begin from the lived experiences of those involved or affected. In-depth interviews were carried out with twenty-two participants who are, or were: involved in ‘gangs’; family members of ‘gangs’; and professionals who work with ‘gangs’ (most of whom were previously involved in such groups themselves). Other ethnographic methods were utilised alongside interviews: primarily overt, with some covert participant observations. Ethnographic aspects of the research were undertaken during a twelve-month period in social spaces that were highlighted by participants as being synonymous with, and frequented, by ‘gangs’. This thesis highlights the conditions, structures, agentive responses and social spaces that form the educative processes for becoming involved in ‘gangs’. My contribution to knowledge herein demonstrates how: education within ‘gangs’ takes place through stories, social haunting and reflection within third places and the wider community; occurs under structural conditions but is mediated by agentive choice; social space fosters a community spirit and offers the opportunity to become someone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".