MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106757846 · doi:10.1007/s11159-020-09873-8

Academic conferencing in the age of COVID-19 and climate crisis: The case of the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES)

2020· article· en· W3106757846 on OpenAlexafffund
Janna Goebel, Caroline Manion, Zsuzsa Millei, Robyn Read, Iveta Silova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Education and Multiculturalism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityArizona State University
KeywordsStatus quoPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political sciencePublic relationsSociologyNorm (philosophy)PoliticsLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, organisers of the annual conference of the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES), held during March and April 2020, share their story of moving the planned on-site conference to a virtual space, as necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Their analysis of the vCIES (the name given to the virtual conference) process not only provides an example of a disruption to the status quo of the institution of conferencing as a result of a global pandemic, but also extends it by addressing the multiplying concerns, urgent considerations and actions needed within academic communities for more equal and accessible conferencing in the unfolding climate catastrophe. The authors begin by discussing the challenge of academic conferencing in the age of COVID-19 and climate crisis. They highlight how their decolonial political stance (which critiques accepting Western knowledge and Western culture as the norm) and their climate-conscious approach informed their preparation of a virtual conference pilot already intended as an experimental extension to this year's on-site event. They suggest the development of this pilot provided the necessary platform for transforming the vCIES into an effective and engaging virtual experience for participants. The vCIES process, including considerations concerning its structure and format and the necessary technology, is detailed in the subsequent sections. In the final part of their article, the authors briefly identify and discuss some of the opportunities, challenges and implications emerging from their vCIES experiences. Ultimately, they suggest that in a time of instability, insecurity and uncertainty, there need to be alternatives to large on-site conferences which require excessive and extensive academic mobility. The vCIES was a step in that direction as an accessible, environmentally responsive, more equal, and intergenerational and multispecies event that welcomed families, children and pets, while opening the space for new interdisciplinary encounters.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0500.027
Scholarly communication0.0190.015
Open science0.0040.021
Research integrity0.0080.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.344 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of EducationSame topicGlobal Education and MulticulturalismFrench-language works237,207