MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W907921605 · doi:10.20381/ruor-16165

Navigating Access: Managing the ambiguity of "special admissions".

2001· dissertation· en· W907921605 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gada. Mahrouse

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2001
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbiguityComputer scienceData scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To facilitate the entry of members of "visible minority" and Aboriginal groups into the teaching profession, the Faculty of Education at the University of Ottawa implemented an "Access" admissions policy in 1994. This study examines how people of colour admitted through this preferential admissions policy are affected by the discursive formations of merit, deficit, and multiculturalism. Furthermore, this study explores the political and pedagogical practices utilized by Access -admitted student teachers of colour to manage their presence in the educational system. Interviews conducted with six people show that being admitted through "special measures" makes it difficult for them to establish their presence as legitimate participants. Their "questionable" presence is further exacerbated by the everyday reality of racism they feel they experience as members of "visible" minority groups. Their ambiguous positioning is negotiated through a number of strategies including challenging, resisting, and/or assimilating into the structures that marginalize them.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.017
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0020.016
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.358 · 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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)→Same topicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes→French-language works237,207→