MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969672938 · doi:10.1177/0741713619870998

Editing <i>Adult Education Quarterly</i> : Reflections on the Editorial Role

2019· article· en· W2969672938 on OpenAlexaff
Leona M. English, Ashley Gleiman, Catherine A. Hansman, Qi Sun, Jeff Zacharakis

Bibliographic record

VenueAdult Education Quarterly · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Adult educationReflection (computer programming)Position (finance)SociologyPolitical sciencePedagogyEngineering ethicsPublic relationsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay is a reflection of our five-year jouney at co-editors of Adult Education Quarterly. We identify some of our accomplishments and challenges, as well as critique some of our editing practices and role as editors. We also discuss our goal to strengthen AEQ’s position as a premier international research journal in adult education and learning, and how we used AEQ Forum as a venue to introduce important issues. Finally we identify some future trends that may affect our journal and profession.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdult Education QuarterlySame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207