Unexpected Journeys: The Professional Identity Development of Canadian Accessibility Advisors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through examining nine Accessibility Advisors' (AA) stories of becoming, this study provides an important entry point into understanding the individuals whose work is central to supporting students with disabilities within Canadian post-secondary institutions. This understanding adds to the existing literature, augmenting the current work on student experience and policy development. The respondents describe an unplanned, but formative, journey that led to a committed career in disability advising. AA’s construction of their professional identities provides a lens into how post-secondary disability support is tied to the medicalization of disability and advisors’ acknowledgement of the social construction of disability. Advisors start their narratives in post-secondary institutions and experiences related to disability, leading up to an unanticipated job opportunity. Once in the role, the narratives note the importance of professional development in understanding the role. As the advisors conclude their stories of becoming, they return to their pre-role experiences adding new intentionality to the past experiences, connecting post-secondary context to a social definition of disability. As a result, the narratives show how AA situate their work as policy drivers as neutral – neither faculty nor student aligned. However, this neutrality reflects the need of the AA in research-focused universities to develop cultural capital as third space professionals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".