MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200262546 · doi:10.15353/cjds.v10i3.826

Teaching Disability Studies Together: The Importance of Having Instructors with Labels of Intellectual Disabilities

2021· article· en· W4200262546 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Micah Fialka-Feldman, Mike Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Disability Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual disabilityDisability studiesEconomic JusticePsychologyMedical educationSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceGender studiesLawPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This short commentary has two goals: 1) to share the unique co-teaching experience of two disabled instructors, one of whom has a label of intellectual disability, and 2) to discuss how we, as two white disabled men, try to incorporate the principles of disability justice in our efforts to disrupt bodymind hierarchies within and outside the university classroom and to share some of the resources we use.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0350.028
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0050.010
Research integrity0.0270.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Disability StudiesSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207