MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199457263 · doi:10.7202/1082919ar

Dependent Rational Activists: Disability, Student Activism, and Special Education

2021· article· en· W3199457263 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Neil Dhingra, Joel D. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Inquiry in Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisability studiesArgument (complex analysis)SociologyBureaucracyPolitical activismPedagogyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsGender studiesMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historians of student activism have rarely focused on students with disabilities, while educational historians who study students with disabilities have focused on legal reforms, not activism. We present a philosophical argument for an inclusive definition of student activism that can take place within legal and bureaucratic processes in which students act collaboratively with parents or guardians. Drawing on the new disability history and critical disability studies, we first argue that such activism is necessary because those processes routinely involve the conceptual objectification, silencing, and invisibilization of disabled people. Further, we argue that activism is necessary to shift individualized education plan (IEP) meetings from bargaining to collective deliberations for the common good. Finally, following Alasdair MacIntyre, we argue that activism, legal and otherwise, may involve families acting collaboratively, because parents and others can become attentive to the rational reflections of those with disabilities.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.044
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.355 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Inquiry in EducationSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207