Testimonial Textures: Examining the Poetics of Non-Indigenous Stories about Reconciliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper arises from a collaborative project of research, exploring non-indigenous attitudes towards national agendas of reconciliation with Aboriginal peoples (Clark et al.; de Costa and Clark). To date the research has focused on Australia and Canada, two countries where Aboriginal reconciliation is posited as a central organizing principle for national policy frameworks aimed at redressing entrenched indigenous disadvantage. Australia and Canada are also two countries whose federal parliaments endorsed resolutions of apology during 2008, apologizing to their indigenous populations for large-scale policies of forcible family separation. The purpose of this project is to gauge the strategic prospects for the national reconciliation projects in both countries, by exploring actual and potential ways in which non-indigenous settler populations — what we might call ‘second peoples’ or ‘subsequent peoples’ — identify with, against, or even without reference to the reconciliation agendas pursued by their respective governments and on their respective behalves. Here we argue that such identifications are highly amenable to a research approach that focuses on the stylistic ways that people share the stories that underpin their experiences and beliefs.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".