MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4240869916 · doi:10.1353/pal.2017.0019

History vs. Historical Memory Rosie Douglas, Black Power on Campus, and the Canadian Color Conceit

2017· article· en· W4240869916 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael O. West

Notice bibliographique

RevuePalimpsest · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCritical Race Theory in Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComplaintRacismSyllabusPower (physics)DutyHistoryPsychologySociologyLawGender studiesPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

History vs. Historical Memory Rosie Douglas, Black Power on Campus, and the Canadian Color Conceit1 Michael O. West (bio) Allegations of Racism in the Classroom, Visited and Revisited The congress of black writers was a genuine boon to the emerging Black Power scene in Montreal. Among other things, it strengthened the resolve of a group of Caribbean students at Sir George to fight racial discrimination on campus. In time, the students' ire came to focus on one particular individual: a biology instructor named Perry Anderson. Professor Anderson, the students alleged, had a history of discriminating against them and giving them lower marks than their work warranted. Yet for many of his accusers, there was no avoiding Professor Anderson. He taught a mandatory course in biology, a popular major among aspiring medical doctors, a category in which many Caribbean students fell.2 After long commiserating among themselves, the students finally worked up the will to formally bring a complaint of racial discrimination against Professor Anderson with the university administration. Two Asian students had also accused Anderson of racial discrimination, but declined to join the formal complaint brought by their Caribbean counterparts. The complaint added up to a syllabus of wrongs, not just about racial discrimination but also about Anderson's competence and his attention to duty. The professor's lectures, the students charged, were poorly prepared and disorganized. Anderson, the complaint went on, was often absent from class, substituting movies for lectures, and took an inordinately long time to return exams. The labs were improperly organized, the students further alleged, while the professor's answers to questions were "so poor as to be embarrassing." The complaint [End Page 178] asserted, too, that Anderson had no scheduled office hours, and failed to keep the appointments he made. At the heart of the students' case against Professor Anderson, however, was the charge of racial discrimination. As exhibit A, the complaint stated that no black student had ever received a grade higher than "C" in Anderson's classes.3 In sum, Anderson's accusers portrayed him as a maladroit instructor who was prejudiced against black students as a group and who, accordingly, consistently marked them down. The dean of science, Samuel Madras, was assigned to look into the students' complaint. The investigation, Dean Madras explained, "consisted of talks" with Anderson and his supervisor, the chair of the biology department. The talks did not include Anderson's student accusers, who were on summer holiday. In the end, Dean Madras absolved Anderson, stating that he was "convinced that there is no substance" to the charge of racial discrimination lodged by the students.4 Madras was silent on the allegation of laxness; that is, the claim that Anderson—a married man with small children who taught both day and night classes at Sir George, even as he pursued a PhD at McGill University—was frequently absent from class and failed to keep appointments with students. The dean did, however, seem to offer some indirect credit to the students' doubts about Anderson's lesson plans, conceding unspecified "academic weaknesses" in the professor's classes, and promising that "every effort will be made to improve the teaching."5 Even so, Professor Anderson was promoted, going from the rank of instructor to that of assistant professor, in addition to being exonerated. As the students who laid the complaint had not been included in his inquiry, it followed that Dean Madras did not bother to apprise them of its outcome. It remained for a jubilant Anderson, at the beginning of the new academic year, 1968–1969, to inform the students of his exoneration.6 The university had failed its first test of the crisis, Dean Madras's undertaking being a parody of an investigation. It was, from all outward appearances, no more than a Sunday afternoon social gathering involving the dean and his two guests, Professor Anderson and the chair of the biology department. Even severe critics of the black students would call Madras's inquiry "clumsy and inadequate."7 Actually, it was a slap in the face, the dean haughtily dismissing the complaint against Anderson without even so much as communicating his decision...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,873
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,003
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,027
Tête enseignante GPT0,321
Écart entre enseignants0,293 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePalimpsestMême sujetCritical Race Theory in EducationTravaux en français237 207