Enllaços de solidaritat i disrupcions afirmatives al món acadèmic: Una conversa amb Katie Strom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aquest article presenta una entrevista amb la professora posthumanista crítica Kathryn (Katie) Strom i les coeditores de la secció 'intra-view' d'aquesta revista acadèmica, Jacky Barreiro i Magali Forte. Al llarg de la seva conversa, Strom comparteix la seva determinació de co-crear vincles de solidaritat i disrupcions afirmatives en el context neoliberal acadèmic i en dóna exemples concrets explicant com la seva praxi feminista va evolucionar. Les tres autores discuteixen diverses iniciatives que Strom i altres i altres han implementat, inspirades en la noció i la praxi d'ètica afirmativa de Braidotti (2019) entre altres estudis feministes, per crear espais de suport per a estudiants de postgrau i acadèmics que inicien la seva carrera. Aquest article anima els lectors a veure i entendre els processos feministes com a interrupcions afirmatives per fomentar fluxos afectius, desafiar convencions i inspirar cerques acadèmiques innovadores.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".