'Whose university is it, anyway? Power and privilege on gendered terrain', edited by Anne Wagner, Sandra Acker and Kimine Mayuzumi: Toronto, Ontario, Sumach Press, 2008, 232 pp., C$28.95 (paperback), ISBN 978-1-894549-75-2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is this book about? This book is about the diversity of human experience. It is about how we must explore our own unique, situated contexts and our own personal narratives in order to live equitably with others. It is about difference and sameness. It is about the day-to-day experiences and negotiated meaning that reflect outwards beyond our single selves to resonate with others. Specifically, this book is primarily written by and about women studying and working in higher education in Canada. I believe that the thesis of the book is succinctly stated in Chapter 5, by Wagner, one of the book's editors: 'Drawing upon a fundamental feminist belief that education and curriculum are sites of struggle and teaching and learning are political acts, the goal then becomes to replace accepted ways of thinking with a framework grounded in a vision of social justice. (p. 100)'
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".