Literacy Entanglements and Relationality, Time, Place, Space and Identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tawaw, or welcome, to this special digital edition of the Language and Literacy journal. This issue is a direct result of the scholarship shared by participants and the development and management of the 18th annual, but first digital, Language and Literacy Researchers of Canada (LLRC/ACCLL) pre-conference by the co-chairs[1] (Jing Jin, Lara Polak, Velvalee Georges, and Yina Liu). The theme, Literacy Entanglements & Relationality: Time, Space, Place, and Identity, aspires to engage researchers in moving beyond entanglement toward evolving relationality through and in the various dimensions of time, space, place, and identity. This theme was intended to create opportunities for researchers to attend to the complexities inherent in broadening and strengthening our understandings of language and literacy entanglement. We anticipated thoughtful conversation about how humans engage with literacy and language at various stages of relations, from superficial acknowledgment to exploring how our messages are transformed by identity, time, space, and place. We wondered how the course of literacy and language research might become more robust by attending to all dimensions, particularly as we move from face-to-face to virtual contexts and digital means.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".