Navigating the Canadian University System: An Exploration of the Experiences, Motivations, and Perceptions of a Sample of Academically Accomplished Black Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reports findings from a qualitative study that explored the postsecondary schooling experiences, motivations, and perceptions of 16 high-achieving Black university students currently enrolled in or who have recently completed various high-profile university programs in Canada. While partly motivated to achieve the academic heights that they have by a desire for monetary reward and prestige, most participants were at least equally motivated by a desire to challenge racial stereotypes, be role models for Black youth, and put themselves in a position to improve the general situation of Black Canadians. There was considerable variation in how participants experienced the Canadian university system. Level of Black identification, gender, and field of study combined in unique ways in participants’ lives to shape their schooling experiences and problematize the notion of an authentic or monolithic Black experience within the academy. In reflecting on the dearth of Black Canadians in prestigious university programs such as engineering, law, and medicine, most participants tended to downplay systemic explanations, emphasizing instead individual and community-based factors. Future research directions are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".