MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017422183 · doi:10.1080/14729679.2020.1755706

Hegemonic masculinity in outdoor education

2020· article· en· W3017422183 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOutdoor and Experiential Education
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegemonic masculinityMasculinityHegemonyScholarshipHeterosexismSociologyGender studiesField (mathematics)Curriculum studiesPedagogyPolitical scienceHomosexualityCurriculumPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing attention is being paid to gender in outdoor education, with scholars and practitioners sharing experiences of sexism and heterosexism and explicitly calling for an examination of hegemonic masculinity in the field. The purpose of this paper is to respond to that call by: summarizing scholarship on hegemonic and alternative masculinities; reviewing research on masculinities in education that is particularly relevant to outdoor education; pointing to existing work in outdoor education that lays a foundation for examining masculinity, including promising recent research; and offering suggestions for disrupting hegemonic masculinity and creating conditions for more diverse gender performances. Since there has been so little research on masculinities in outdoor education thus far, there remain significant unanswered questions. It is past time for focused examination of hegemonic masculinity in the field as one strategy for addressing gender inequity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.322 · 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