MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383767075 · doi:10.56687/9781447350064-005

Accountability literacies and conflictual cooperation in community-based organisations for young people in Québec

2019· book-chapter· en· W4383767075 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Virginie Thériault

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityPolitical scienceSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the Canadian and Québec Governments have increased their involvement with community-based organisations partly because of their potential economic benefits for society and the State. Community-based organisations can find themselves in a situation of ‘conflictual cooperation’, where they receive funding from the State, but also maintain a critical stance towards it. The chapter draws on an ethnographic and participatory study conducted in two community-based organisations for young people in the Province of Québec, Canada. The aim is to understand how youth workers managed to navigate an accountability regime and its literacies. Resourcefulness, awareness, and creativity were identified as key elements to navigate accountability literacies in the two organisations. Youth workers were forced to engage with neoliberal practices, but also found ways of adapting them so that they would be meaningful to the young people with whom they were working.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Press eBooksSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207