Gender nonconforming boys: a qualitative study of lived experiences in high school
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the reflections of gender nonconforming men on their lived-experiences as boys in the heteronormative environment of high schools. Participants self-selected for the study based on their perceptions of being othered as boys in high school due to their nonconforming expression of gender. The study targeted men who had graduated with a Manitoba High School Diploma within the last 5 years. The methodology of this study was underpinned by an interpretivist theoretical perspective. The purpose of the research and the positioning of the researcher were influenced by the socially critical research paradigm. Narrative methods were utilized for the reporting; the lived experiences of the participants while in high school. The study found that high schools continue to be heteronormative environments that present difficulties for gender nonconforming boys. Although participants felt that the situation in high schools may be improving, all felt that much more can, and should, be done to improve conditions for gender nonconforming youth. Findings suggest that policy and practice at the school, district, and provincial levels need to be examined and, where necessary, changed to address the treatment of gender nonconforming boys in high schools.
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 | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".