Restorying Belonging in STEM by Unpacking Affective Politics at Work in Higher Education and Beyond: A Response to El Halwany and Adams
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this response to El Halwany and Adam's paper as part of the special issue Centering Affect and Emotion Toward Justice and Dignity in Science Education, I restory belonging in STEM by unpacking further the affective politics at work in Higher Education. As illustrated in the paper and expanded on in this commentary, to become somebody in STEM is a complex lifelong process which I suggest can be understood through conceptual lenses such as wayfaring, knots, and complex meshworks. The latter make possible the highlighting of infinite ways of figuring science and becoming a science person as one is on the move, a life‐long embodied process, entangled and marked by intersectionality and emotions. Through engagement with affect, the political, and the kinds of methodological footings called for, the commentary aims to highlight the generative and transformational potential of such work for the weaving of an otherwise of postsecondary STEM.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it