Racism, eh? Interactions of South Asian Students with Mainstream Faculty in a Predominantly White Canadian University
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
Considerations of the interactions between minority students and mainstream faculty in academe have only partially portrayed the enigma of racism. Through this qualitative study of twenty-two South- Asian-students in a predominantly white Canadian university, we investigate how discourses of racism are categorically produced and performed through power relations, notions of ethnicity, negative images and stereotypes that acquire ideological significance in the ivory tower. We argue that both overt and covert racism, more than a mere representation of tension and two solitudes is programmed in the powerful postmodern/postcolonial discourse of the culture of the "Other ". As practiced in the current teaching and learning environment, it seems that differential treatment, inequity, and negligence are perceived in the daily interactions between minority students and mainstream faculty, affecting overall evaluations, grading, tracking, and teaching styles. This analytical inquiry recommends that a critical mass of professors from visible minority and designated groups is needed to address these negative perceptions, leading to a wholesome academic environment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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