Cultivating Inclusion: Belonging and Agency in Young Black Men through Civic Action Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines how community-based civic action research can cultivate civic engagement, civic belonging, and shifts in civic stakeholders’ perceptions of racially and economically minoritized youth’s civic agency. Specifically, this paper examines the implementation of Youth, Research and Plan (YRP) – a community-based research methodology that cultivates equitable relationships between schools, cities, and communities by situating disenfranchised youth and their schools at the center of civic and urban planning – in a unique academic program focused on the development of Black manhood and achievement in a public high school. Using a Critical Race Theoretical application of Communities of Practice and drawing on qualitative data gathered over the course of two years, we show how YRP was instrumental in the development of three interrelated communities of practice that supported the youth’s academic endeavors and civic agency and yielded important shifts in civic stakeholders’ perceptions of and relations with Black urban youth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".