MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115172538 · doi:10.1080/01425692.2025.2594542

Black student university access network project: lessons learned from Black first-year undergraduate students in Canada

2025· article· en· W7115172538 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sociology of Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
FundersEmployment and Social Development Canada
KeywordsHigher educationQualitative researchAccess to Higher EducationRacismSocial network (sociolinguistics)Social network analysisRace (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A paucity of research exists regarding what systems are in place to support university access for Black students. The discussion draws from the Black Student University Access Network (BSUAN) Project, which studied the academic needs of Black students attending a university in a Western province in Canada. Contextualizing the BSUAN study were such factors as underrepresentation and academic needs of Black students, mentoring programs, support systems, the specific demographic information regarding Black student enrolment that existed at the institution, and the historical conditions underpinning institutional relations about what student enrolment data ought to be collected and reported. By way of a qualitative case study, the research team draw on stories from Black students’ experiences in a higher education institution in Calgary, to consider contemporary and historical colonial matters to nurture ethical questions and material responses concerning teaching and learning and the educational concerns of Black students.

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)0.010
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0320.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.372 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sociology of EducationSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207