Co-creating knowledge through co-operative inquiry:Using participatory writing to promote inclusion and solidarity within research, education and practice
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our talk aligns with sub-theme 4 by showcasing collaborative writing that empowers diverse international voices, co-produces knowledge, enhances accessibility, and fosters social impact through inclusive, experiential, and social justice-oriented writing practices. This presentation synthesises 12 years of work developing a collaborative participatory writing framework that is in use by the International Network of Co-operative Inquirers (INCinq). In this presentation, members of the International Network of Cooperative Inquirers (INCInq) will introduce our evolving model of collaborative, participatory writing. The Network utilises online technologies to enable inquirers access to knowledge-generation and participatory writing methods. This process spans distance, time zones, professional experience and personal identities. The INCInq writing methodology fosters the inclusion of diverse experiential, practical, presentational and propositional knowledges and perspectives. INCInq has over 50 members, including educators and researchers from 8 countries, and leverages online technologies to enable international research partnerships. The writing framework that we will present facilitates the sharing of power and co-authoring of research. Individual members have also been using this collective writing technique as a pedagogical tool to encourage everyone in the learning and teaching space to share power and their voice. Furthermore, some social work practitioners have been using this approach to communicate and collaboratively document their practice wisdom with others. The presenters will outline our experience of how participatory writing advances co-creation, co-design and co-production to generate socially impactful outputs that promote social justice and wellbeing.<br/>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.039 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it