MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019478637 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2013.825205

Decolonising development studies: reflections on critical pedagogies in action

2013· article· en· W2019478637 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jonathan Langdon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersWorld Bank Group
KeywordsHumanitiesDecolonizationSociologyEthnologyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on the author's previous arguments that beginnings and framing matter in pedagogy, this article calls for a continuation of the decolonisation project that accompanied the emergence of development studies. Both the material and the discursive sides of decolonisation need to be addressed. This means not only destabilising Eurocentric conceptual frameworks, but also actively contesting the continued colonisation and inequity in university programs and campuses. Among the pedagogic approaches suggested are the inclusion of marginalised and indigenous voices in course materials, questioning the Eurocentric norms educators and students may hold, and consciously blurring the line between activism and scholarship. Résumé Dans cet article, l'auteur développe ses positions antérieures sur l'importance de bien poser le sujet dès le début d'une activité pédagogique et soutient qu'il faut poursuivre le projet de décolonisation qui a accompagné la naissance des études du développement. L'examen des dimensions matérielles et discursives de la décolonisation implique non seulement la déstabilisation des cadres d'analyse eurocentriques, mais aussi la contestation active des rapports coloniaux et de l'iniquité encore présents dans les programmes universitaires et sur les campus. À cette fin, l'auteur propose des approches pédagogiques telles que l'inclusion, dans le matériel pédagogique, de la parole marginalisée et indigène, la remise en question des points de vue eurocentriques que les enseignants et les étudiants peuvent véhiculer et l'atténuation volontaire de la ligne de partage entre l'activisme et la recherche.

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)0.055
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0550.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.112
Scholarly communication0.0230.018
Open science0.0050.028
Research integrity0.0060.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations69
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développementSame topicTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207