MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2902824143 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-12241

Toward a New (Eco)Feminist Future: Mainstreaming Nonhuman Animals in Feminist Studies

2017· dissertation· en· W2902824143 on OpenAlexaffabout
Priya Kumar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionSituatedFeminist philosophySociologyFeminismRacismMainstreamingScope (computer science)Feminist theoryCurriculumGender mainstreamingEcofeminismGender studiesIntersectionalityEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyPedagogyPolitical scienceGender equalityPoliticsLawPhilosophySpecial education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis proposes a new direction for foundational feminist pedagogy, with the express purpose of mainstreaming a consideration of nonhuman animals in feminist studies curricula. Ecofeminists have effectively situated speciesism – the systematic discrimination against nonhuman animals based on a belief in human superiority over all else – as a structural oppression, one that intersects with other forms of oppression such as racism and sexism. However, this is not reflected in the introductory course which is a crucial pedagogical site. This thesis presents a vision for a new feminist future with the hope that it will expand the scope of feminist pedagogy and broaden our understanding of oppression, and lead to holistic strategies for change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.047
Scholarly communication0.0120.017
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeographies of human-animal interactions→French-language works237,207→