MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913206505

The Imagined Reproductive Futures of Post-Graduate Students

2018· dissertation· en· W2913206505 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelsey Marr

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractMathematics educationPsychologyEconomicsFinancial economics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on critical-interpretive medical anthropology and assemblage theory (Mol 2002), this thesis explores how thirty post-graduate students at the University of Saskatchewan enact their imagined reproductive futures. This ethnographic research was conducted using the methods of walkabouts, participant observation, and semi-structured one-on-one interviews, and finds that participants draw upon various enactments of “the right time” to be and become parents, and performances of femininity in order to normalize and naturalize their imagined reproductive futures in the context of delayed parenthood and long-term educational attainment. By emphasizing and prioritizing models of educational, professional, and reproductive time, these students not only preface accepted social norms of Canadian culture, but further normalize their delayed parenthood within the public of post-graduate students by engaging with the normative temporal model of “the right time.” Their imagined reproductive futures are further shaped by their negotiation of the well-noted tension between academic and professional work, and femininity; they bring together discourses and social norms of who and what is a good, natural mother, and a particular understanding of femininity to bring their imagined reproductive futures into being. Finally, the data collected during this study highlights the need for further research into both students’ conceptions of infertility and ARTs, and how assumedly fertile individuals frame and understand their reproductive capabilities. This research contributes to the literature on student culture, while highlighting the dearth of research that has been previously been conducted with post-graduate students. Further research into both student culture itself, and the role of university institutions in the enactment of such culture, needs to be conducted.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.022
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207