MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THINKING WITH PAINT: TROUBLING SETTLER COLONIALISMS THROUGH EARLY CHILDHOOD ART PEDAGOGIES

2014· article· en· W1919501834 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStorytellingColonialismIndigenousContext (archaeology)AestheticsPaintingSociologyVisual artsGestureArtGender studiesHistoryNarrativeLiteratureLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we think with the specificities of paint to tell stories about entanglements of settler colonialism and paint and painting in early childhood art education. We see to become implicated (Razack, 1998) within settler colonialism in the context we now call Canada. We paint a messy non-linear picture of our work with children through a process of storytelling. Through complex pictures of how we are attempting (even if partially and imperfectly) to respond and stay with the trouble our stories bring forward, we gesture toward hope and decolonizing strategies. Our work takes inspiration from contemporary artists and from anti-racist and Indigenous scholars.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.235 · 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