MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390942661 · doi:10.5334/ijic.icic23611

Community Engagement from Theory to Practice: Co-design and Implementation of Inclusive Language Principles in a Community-based Organization Serving People with Disabilities

2023· article· en· W4390942661 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joseph Fulton, Alana Armas, Hayley R. Crooks, Gift Tshuma, Karen Whitehead-Lye, W. Francis Fung, Rambel Palsis, T. H. Trang Nguyen, Sasha Elford, Barbara Moore, Michelle Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Teacher Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of ManitobaSinai Health SystemMarch of Dimes Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity engagementPlain languagePublic relationsPraxisSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: March of Dimes Canada (MODC) is one of the largest non-profit organizations in Canada that provides programs and support services to people with disabilities. MODC is in the process of transforming all its programming and services using co-design to better meet the needs of people with disabilities. The Empowering Client Voices (ECV) initiative was designed to create a co-designed community engagement framework to center the voices and ideas of people with disabilities in how the organization engages with its community and provides services. This project looks to fill a gap in knowledge of how community-based organizations can move from theory to praxis when using co-design and community engagement. Methods: The initiative is a three-phase process: (1) internal review of current organization engagement practices; (2) external environmental scan and a rapid review; and (3) two advisory committees to develop the principles for greater community engagement. The purpose of the co-designed community engagement framework is to create actionable principles based on the guidance of our advisory committees and other research tools. Phases 1 and 2 will create foundational themes to be discussed with our advisory committee made of people with disabilities. These themes will help provide initial guideposts for discussions about what community engagement should be within MODC. Language will be the first theme to be explored with the advisory committee to create recommendations and guidelines for better communication and inclusive language across the organization. Results: The inclusive language recommendations and guidelines developed by the ECV Advisory Committee will initiate the development of an inclusive language toolkit by the research team. The inclusive language toolkit will be shared throughout the organization as a template to follow when discussing disability and people with disabilities using language that represents our community in their own words. Before the start of the ECV Initiative, inclusive language guidelines did not exist within the organization requiring the development and implementation of a change-management process at the Micro (MODC staff members) and Meso (Organization) to ensure the guidelines will be adopted across a national community-based organization. Discussion and Conclusion: This poster presentation will outline the development of the co-designed inclusive language toolkit and change management process for our organization to adopt standardized inclusive language through all forms of community engagement and communication in collaboration with people with disabilities in our communities of operation. International audiences can use our project as a case study of how co-design can inform and drive organizational change. This case study will highlight the implementation factors that were found to be advantageous in a community-based organization, factors that hindered organizational change, and mitigation techniques used to make lasting change across the organization. Lessons and Future Research: Future research for the ECV Initiative will continue to implement the additional themes within the ECV community engagement framework with the intention of making the additional toolkits based on co-designed themes and change management knowledge products publicly available to help other community-based organizations improve their own community-engagement practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Integrated CareSame topicEducation and Teacher TrainingFrench-language works237,207