MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404666621 · doi:10.1080/01596306.2024.2426298

Radical care as epistemic justice: a queer and trans refusal of neoliberalism, whiteness and the settler-colonial gaze

2024· article· en· W4404666621 on OpenAlexaff
Bishop Owis

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Race Theory in Education
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeoliberalism (international relations)QueerGazeSociologyColonialismEconomic JusticeSocial justiceGender studiesAestheticsQueer theorySocial sciencePsychoanalysisPolitical sciencePsychologyPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper weaves together lineages of queer and trans theories through the lived experiences of a queer, trans, genderqueer, disabled, neurodivergent scholar of color. I share testimonies of epistemic injustice as a K-12 and university student which, while lifesaving in some ways, reinscribed neoliberal notions of individualized care through the cis-het white, necropolitical, settler-colonial gaze. These acts illustrate the extent to which queer, trans, disabled, neurodivergent and racialized people are hermeneutically marginalized through discursive, relational educational understandings of care that employ a neoliberal, white, colonial, cisheterosexist lens. I also provide insights into queered and transgressive forms of care that refuse the limitations of white, colonial, cisheterosexist ideology and demand epistemic justice. Overall, the paper offers innovative ways to think about epistemic injustice and care as interrelated ethical problems in educational institutions.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.080
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.435 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of EducationSame topicCritical Race Theory in EducationFrench-language works237,207