MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413118961 · doi:10.1177/14647001251362636

Called to speak up: BIPOC women academics’ sense of power, calling and constructive voice

2025· article· en· W4413118961 on OpenAlex
Tina Sharifi, Ayesha Tabassum, Souha R. Ezzedeen

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

VenueFeminist Theory · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructivePower (physics)SociologySense (electronics)LinguisticsPsychologyCommunicationComputer sciencePhilosophyEngineeringProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black, Indigenous and People of Colour (BIPOC) women academics face a paradox in higher education – tasked with championing diversity and critical inquiry, yet their voices are often silenced and their labour undervalued. This Interchanges piece examines how intersecting oppressions shape BIPOC women's sense of power, calling and capacity for constructive voice. Drawing from empirical and theoretical scholarship, we illustrate that despite systemic barriers, BIPOC women's calling motivates their intellectual activism to resist their collective marginalisation. However, this calling is frequently instrumentalised by institutions, where their services, particularly in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, mentorship and care work, are undervalued or unrecognised. We call for institutional reforms to acknowledge and redistribute this labour, ensuring that calling is sustained as empowerment rather than exploitation.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.269 · 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