Advocates and Allies: The Succession of a Good Idea or What’s in a Meme? (Dispatch)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this two-part Dispatch we first trace the evolution of three interdependent terms – advocacy, allyship, and accountability – as a means to highlight their changing roles in driving impactful social justice efforts, then explore how this triad is manifested in a gender equity advocacy program fashioned at a Midwestern United States university, the Advocates and Allies (A&A) initiative. In Part 1, we describe a memetic theory of culture to situate the findings of an Internet term search that reveals a mutable progression of meaning(s) for our threesome. This framework provides grounding for discussion in Part 2 of the wider social milieu reflected in the evolution of A&A. We then offer an outline of central features of the initiative along with reflections from the field, and point out resources for learning more about how the program is being utilized. By surveying the succession of A&A within this culture-as-memetic context we intend to acknowledge what’s been done by others whilst furthering the important and unfinished work of gender equity in academia. We close with interpretations and conclusions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it