MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403379884 · doi:10.54337/nlc.v8.9111

The politics of the delete button

2012· article· en· W4403379884 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Networked Learning · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunism, Protests, Social Movements
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workers today are faced with possibilities of wider networks of knowledge generation. Learning in and through work is one of the many spaces in which pedagogy may unfold. Web technologies amplify this fluidity and networked learning now encompasses a plethora of practices. New technologies are believed to contribute to more mobile and connected professional learning and knowing practices. Yet, objects do not act by themselves, and it is the relations around these technologies—the sociomateriality of the configurations assembled—which potentially reconfigure ways of knowing. In this paper, the negotiation of relational and material aspects of online pedagogical practices is explored. I focus on the delete button and deleting practices of self-employed workers engaged in informal work-related learning in online communities. Exploring a pervasive everyday practice, such as deleting, affords glimpses into the sociomaterial entanglements energizing enactments of online pedagogy and knowledge production. Understanding the delete button as a fluid object in fluid space begins to illuminate its complexity. Deleting practices which work to stem the tide of information pushing itself onto screens, as well as those practices that attempt to delete traces left behind on screens and “in the cloud”, are examined. Constantly negotiating absence and presence, deleting practices mobilize both digital inclusion and exclusion. Such sociomaterial practices around the delete button shape interactions with information and knowing possibilities and enact networked learning practices in particular ways. Although disarmingly straightforward at first glance, by unravelling some of the complex human-object assemblages associated with deleting, opportunities for interruption and innovation in online learning practices emerge. Actor Network Theory (ANT) provides the theoretical and conceptual tools for this exploration. ANT is well suited for studying complex and mobile practices which take the pervasive role and energy of objects into account. Emphasizing more critical understandings of the co-constitutive and performative relationship between people and web technologies, and how these relations both smooth and complicate work-learning practices online, enables adult educators to keep Latour’s (2005) “matters of concern” open. I conclude with observations on the politics of the delete button and implications for more sophisticated digital fluency in everyday pedagogy.

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.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.271 · 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