MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132961957

The Politics of Passing: Disabled and Mad Students’ Experiences of Disclosure in Higher Education

2019· dissertation· W7132961957 on OpenAlexaff
Fady Shanouda

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2019
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEugenicsHigher educationEmbodied cognitionPoliticsDisability studiesOperationalizationConstruct (python library)Materialism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation explores disabled and mad students experiences of disclosure in higher education from a Deleuzian new materialist perspective. This theoretical orientation conceptualized students’ movements through the university as rhizomatic, and included passing, moving into the middle, and coming out. The author argues that these movements create an affective politics within the university that can change and rearrange the university in meaningful ways for individuals with embodied differences. The author organizes the relationship between students and the university using la paperson’s (2017) idea that there are two competing machinic-desires operating within higher education. In this thesis, these desires are defined as eugenic and crip. Eugenic desires operate within the university and construct assemblages with eugenic ends and are operationalized by the disclosure process. Crip desires, on the other hand are a passional understanding of disability and madness as multiplicity (rather than a binary) that can build the university anew. Crip desires are constituted by disabled and mad students and create assemblages that deterritorialize the university. The impact of disclosure was made clear by the 17 disabled and mad participants who shared stories of disclosure’s affective violence (when registering as a “student with a disability,” or disclosing to faculty or staff, and petitioning a grade or a course). The author argues that disclosure produces violence in higher education because it reduces embodied differences to biomedical and psychiatric explanations – often limiting disability/madness from becoming anything other. However, there are other ways that students speak about disability and move in-between identities that allow for a different understanding of disability and madness to emerge. When students come out-crip, they story difference rather than disclose disability, and therefore, create new conditions for how access might be arranged. The author argues that a more complex understanding of students’ movements and actions as rhizomatic reveals that they are engaged in micropolitical work with identity that can create small and slow cracks in the university. In asking participants to imagine a different university, this project engages in a thinking-resistance that works towards actualizing different conditions for learning in higher education.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0270.039
Scholarly communication0.0200.012
Open science0.0020.028
Research integrity0.0040.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.379 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicPosthumanist Ethics and ActivismFrench-language works237,207