MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948016590 · doi:10.15402/esj.v5i2.68331

Narrative Métissage as an Innovative Engagement Practice

2019· article· en· W2948016590 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kathy Bishop, Catherine Etmanski, M. Beth Page, Brian Dominguez, Cheryl Heykoop

Bibliographic record

VenueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeSociologyBusinessLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Métissage is a creative method that can be used for engaging people in research, learning, teaching, and community or organizational development. As five authors, we offer a window into our diverse experiences with métissage,providing a theoretical overview, a practical description of insights and processes when facilitating métissage workshops, some key lessons learned, and an example of a simple woven narrative of our experiences with métissage.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0030.021
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and LearningSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207