Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on year-long fieldwork on activist-educators’ work in South Korea, I reflect on how my research complicates the ontological shift in institutional ethnography: that is, the shift that emphasizes how ruling relations are coordinated through the very actions of people. I discuss two facets of reflective pauses. First, I discuss how the ruling relations of research practice in South Korea render the ontological shift “slippery.” I argue for a need to understand the ontological shift in relation to external contexts of research instead of an individualized approach. Second, I detail the process of a comparative research design looking at activist-educators with differing levels of engagement with the Korean state. I highlight how a transitional void that emerged after democratization prompted different activist strategies. I call for a need to reconsider the connection between activists’ work and institutional ethnography, where investigating activists’ work provides a lens into the ruling relations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.105 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".