Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autoethnography allows us to “go beyond simply looking at the artifacts or just the surface and to focus much more on the personal, the hidden, and the less obvious” (Lapidus, Kaveh, & Hirano, 2013, p. 34), and it is becoming more important to illustrate a constructive relationship between diverse professional communities, as English as a global language acquire local identities and local professional communities develop socially situated pedagogical practices (Canagarajah, 2012). This paper explores identity negotiation of the author, a transnational EAL student and a teacher through an autoethnography. Using concept of “audibility”, “agency”, “nobody”, and “somebody” (Kettle, 2005) and communities of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998), this paper unpacks the complexity of identity negotiation of an EAL student, and how it affected her teaching. It also provides an opportunity to rethink the definition of success.
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".