MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7023781399

Pushing privileged pillars in Canadian universities

2021· dissertation· en· W7023781399 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipatory action researchGrassrootsUnderclassPovertyHonourLegislationCitizen journalismFeminism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian federal discrimination legislation excludes social class which leaves poverty, or “social condition” (MacKay & Kim, 2009), out of universities’ equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) mandates. By refusing to widen access and participation (WAP) for students whose lives are shaped by poverty, Canadian universities are complicit in perpetuating poverty across generations. This seven-month community-based participatory action research project used conversations, focus groups, case studies, and integrated knowledge mobilization. Research Sisters, Canadian women with lived experiences of poverty who accessed an undergraduate degree at a Canadian university, explored: 1) Why they are an important demographic to Canadian universities, and 2) How university leaders can create non-deficit-based and decolonial WAP for poverty-class people. Four key themes were discovered: First, conversations centered on the voices of participants through the building of trust and the creation of the Underclass Sisterhood of Solidarity, based upon the late feminist scholar and activist María Lugones’ (1987) theory of “world”-travelling with “loving” versus “arrogant” perception. Second, research Sisters refused to justify their social class worthiness to be in university (Phillips, 2021). Third, knowledge democracy was central to honour the knowledge systems and cultures of poverty-class students. Fourth, research Sisters used their experiences to work towards creating a grassroots social innovation model to teach university leaders how to create sustainable WAP solutions that address structural classism and poverty discrimination from an intersectional framework. This research demonstrates the need for radical imagination in crafting WAP solutions for poverty-class students. There are four spaces that might inform WAP initiatives: 1) Radical imagination space, 2) Emotional and spiritual space, 3) Material, cultural and social support spaces, and 4) Epistemological space. These spaces must be created by and for those with lived experiences of poverty. Furthermore, the (gendered nature of) poverty discrimination in Canada must be addressed through legislation where social class is included in equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) mandates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0830.024
Scholarly communication0.0170.005
Open science0.0040.019
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Same topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207