MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033133928

Pedagogical Over Punitive: The Academic Integrity Websites of Ontario Universities

2013· article· en· W7033133928 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Cultural Memory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateScholarshipPromotion (chess)Academic integrityHigher educationAccess to information
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is a snapshot of how Ontario universities are currently promoting
\nacademic integrity (AI) online. Rather than concentrating on policies, this
\npaper uses a semiotic methodology to consider how the websites of Ontario’s
\npublicly funded universities present AI through language and image. The paper
\nbegins by surveying each website and documenting emerging language-based
\ntrends like interpellating different audiences, inducting students into
\na larger scholarly community, and appealing to peer disapproval. The paper
\nalso records how these websites visually communicate AI through images and
\nvideo, arguing that image and text inform one another in a two-way relationship:
\nfor example, a punitive image may undermine an otherwise textually
\npedagogical website. Overall, the majority of Ontario websites have a decidedly
\neducative mandate in their online AI resources, aligning with current AI
\nscholarship that lauds education rather than after-the-fact punishment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2160.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.206 · 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