MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236544818 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10367

Making Politics and Creating Spaces: A Study of the 2012 Québec Student Strikes

2014· dissertation· en· W4236544818 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tabatha Armstrong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityCanadiana.orgUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversité de MontréalConcordia UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsPoliticsCitizenshipAutonomySpace (punctuation)Representation (politics)Experiential learningSociologyPublic spaceAction (physics)Political scienceWork (physics)PedagogyMedia studiesEpistemologyLawEngineeringComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work uses historical, theoretical, and experiential lenses to examine the Québec Student Strikes of 2012.The first section of the work offers a condensed history of the evolution of post-secondary education (PSE) in Québec followed by a parallel review of student activism.The second chapter focuses on different conceptions of political and public space.By focusing on public space and the university as a changing spatial milieu and space of politics, I underline the multiplicity and polyvalence of space, and the ways in which people like students act upon and within spaces to renegotiate and reclaim them.The final chapter presents conversations from seven interviews with individuals who participated in the strike actions followed by theoretical reflections that relate back to the central themes of citizenship, representation, and political action and autonomy. List of Acronyms AFESH-UQAM -Association facultaire étudiante

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0400.017
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation, sociology, and vocational training→French-language works237,207→