MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021699633 · doi:10.1080/03626784.2020.1754730

What grade are you in? On being a non-binary researcher

2020· article· en· W3021699633 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

VenueCurriculum Inquiry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresumptionNormativeSociologyField (mathematics)Adult educationPedagogyBinary oppositionSpace (punctuation)PsychologyGender studiesEpistemologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, I draw on my experiences as a non-binary researcher in a high school to interrogate the normative construction of adulthood. I centre the discussion on the concept of adulthood in order to interrogate a presumption within the field of education that all researchers are recognized as adults. I argue that a person’s adherence to cisheteronormative logics is an integral aspect of being recognized as an adult and that people who do not move in legible ways along a socio-culturally prescribed trajectory of growing up can instead be positioned as non-adults. I explore the complexities of generating research in an age-striated space as a person who is not read as an adult. I argue that non-adults navigate distinct challenges as well as unique possibilities in education research because of their divergent ways of moving through field sites. I assert that grappling with questions of adulthood is necessary for youth-focused education research and end with ideas on what this thinking may make possible for future methodological work.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.263 · 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