MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992691732 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v16i1.1891

What Counts? Examining Academic Values and Women's Life Experiences from a Critical Feminist Perspective

2002· article· en· W2992691732 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)SociologyFeminismGender studiesPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women comprise the majority of students in adult education, but the experiences of women continue to be marginalized and devalued in the academic sphere. This article provides an exploration of the current critical analysis of the marketplace influence on adult education, and a comparative feminist analysis with a critical perspective. I argue for the development of a critical feminist approach to adult education that acknowledges the importance of women's life experiences and connections to the homeplace. Various research studies are correlated with my own experience to provide an alternative value set from which to challenge existing marketplace influences within academia, and redefine the way society assesses "what counts" as important work and learning experiences. The critical discourse I advocate supports the work that women do in the homeplace, as students and as academics; the process can lead to a more holistic and inclusive approach to adult education. Résumé Bien que les femmes représentent la majeure partie de l'effectif étudiant dans les programmes de formation pour adultes, leurs expériences continuent à être marginalisées et dévalorisées dans les milieux universitaires. Cet article explore l'analyse critique actuelle portant sur l'influence du marché dans le domaine de la formation pour adultes et offre une analyse féministe comparative fondée sur une perspective critique. J'y prône le développement d'une approche féministe critique en matière de formation pour adultes, qui tienne compte de l'importance des expériences vécues par les femmes et des liens qu'elles entretiennent avec la maison. L'article présente diverses études qui corroborent mon expérience et mettent de l'avant un nouvel ensemble de valeurs. Ces valeurs contribuent à remettre en question l'influence du marché dans les milieux universitaires et à redéfinir la manière par laquelle on évalue 'ce qui compte' vraiment sur les plans du travail et des expériences d'apprentissage. Par ce discours critique, j'entends appuyer le travail que font les femmes à la maison, en tant qu'étudiantes et en tant que chercheurs; ce processus est susceptible de mener à une approche en matière de formation pour adultes qui soil plus globale et respectueuse des différences.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.242 · 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