A Co-creation Approach to Integrating Student Voice in Decision-Making Processes: Imagining Student Housing Co-design Project at OCAD University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research project addresses the urgent need for inclusive student housing solutions at OCAD University in Toronto, Ontario, tackling complex challenges faced by its diverse student body. Initiated by first-hand experiences of housing instability exacerbated by post-pandemic economic strains and systemic disparities, our study adopts inclusive design methodologies, departing from conventional paradigms to embrace co-creation and co-design with students. Our research focuses on three primary issues: the inequities for international students, obstacles to integrating student voice in university decision-making processes, and housing insecurities compounded by affordability issues. \n \nRooted in our collective ethos of "Living in the -ish," we embrace ambiguity, uncertainty, and radical imagination as drivers for transformative design. Central to our research are the insights gained from our co-designers, OCAD U students. Through collaborative efforts, we strive to amplify student voices, identify housing barriers, and outline design considerations for future housing developments. The co-design workshop emphasized the importance of providing a platform for individuals to share their narratives, leveraging design as a vehicle for empowerment and advocacy. \n \nOur project highlights a novel pathway for student integration in research and decision-making processes at the institutional level. By fostering sustainable partnerships with students and nurturing trust, universities can pave the way for more inclusive governance structures and student-centred initiatives. We advocate for the ongoing integration of student voice in university decision-making processes, emphasizing meaningful participation, resource sharing, and transparent communication. \n \nBy disseminating our research findings and leveraging co-design methodologies, we aim to inspire systemic change, empower student communities, and foster a more inclusive future in student housing.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".