MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098041070

New families, new texts: An exploration of viewing, text, and schooling from the perspective of being an “other kind of family”. Language and Literacy: A Canadian Educational E-Journal

2010· article· en· W7098041070 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)NormativeNarrativeNatural (archaeology)Sexual difference
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

…the nuclear family has, since the mid-twentieth century, been constructed as the natural social form in western epistemology and has informed much of the theorizing of the family in the West…. It has become a normative narrative against which others, and ourselves, have been measured. (Carrington, 2002, p. 17) My family is different. Not by any stretch of the imagination do we fit into the “normative narrative ” Carrington (2002) describes, nor do we fit into the “severely normal ” category described by former Alberta premier Ralph Klein, in reference to the typical Alberta family. I adopted my daughters as a single parent, as a third generation Canadian woman of mixed European and British ancestry, living in a Canadian province where relatively few singles adopt, a place that has been publicly known for being less tolerant of difference (Filax, 2002), and where, more recently, Bill 44 has been passed, allowing parents to have their children opt out (and be notified in advance) of any classroom discussions involving religion, sexual orientation, and sexuality, said to be supported by “severely normal Albertans ” (see CBC News, 2009).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0350.053
Scholarly communication0.0260.020
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207