MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309045172 · doi:10.31468/dwr.997

Introduction: The CWCA/ACCR Conference on Transformative Inclusivity

2022· article· en· W4309045172 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Srividya Natarajan, Lisa Kovac

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse and Writing/Rédactologie · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Science and Policy Research
Canadian institutionsThe King's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CWCA/ACCR annual conference with the theme of Transformative Inclusivity was to have been held in London, Ontario, in May 2020.By April 2020, it became clear that gathering in person was not viable, and the conference was postponed to 2021.Across the world, 2020-2022 were the years of the pandemic, which made us acutely aware of bodily vulnerability as well as of ableism at the individual, governmental, and institutional levels.Across the world, but especially in the North American context, these were also the years that saw a revival of antiracist energy, in the wake of the grassroots protests sparked by the murder of George Floyd by American police, and by multiple similar incidents of white supremacist violence.In Canada, the discovery of unmarked graves in the homeland of the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc Nation corroborated the narratives of residential school survivors and forced many settlers to finally acknowledge the realities and ongoing impacts of the genocide perpetrated on Indigenous Peoples in this country.In London, Ontario, where the editors of this special section live, in June 2021, four members of the Afzaal family were murdered for being racialized and Muslim by an angry white man.Writing centres could not remain secluded from the moral shock or the pedagogical and practical implications of these developments.As the pandemic unfolded, our worlds shrank to some degree, but at the same time we seemed to end up paying greater attention to social inequity all around us.We put on our masks and joined large public gatherings that mourned the people lost to these terrible events, and we grew more deeply conscious of the injustices that our "normal" lives normalized.The energy of protest flowed into many of the things we did during these years.In post-secondary

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0210.008
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0110.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.017

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscourse and Writing/RédactologieSame topicSocial Science and Policy ResearchFrench-language works237,207