MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898109923 · doi:10.17583/qre.2018.3482

Formarse en la Investigación Educativa: una Comunidad de Pensamiento en Torno a la Escritura de la Tesis Doctoral

2018· article· en· W2898109923 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

VenueQualitative Research in Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicE-Learning and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyContext (archaeology)NarrativePedagogyNarrative inquiryAcademic communityHumanitiesSocial scienceArtGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores educative experiences we had as doctoral students in a community of knowledge inside the University of Barcelona. We deepen understandings around the process we lived for five years, as well as we point out theoretical and methodological aspects that framed the process itself. Embracing narrative inquiry as methodology, we enhance the need of shifting some of the doctoral training practices that traditional academic systems still hold. Through our stories, we show bumps and tensions that might emerge in living and working in a community of knowledge. We also raise challenges that beginning researchers are currently facing in the educational landscape. Those challenges are related to the ways in which we inquire, approach, attend to, and name the research experience in the context of increasingly high academic demands.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.418 · 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