Denials of Racism in Canadian English Language Textbooks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This critical discourse analysis examines denials of racism in descriptions of Canada and Canadians from English language textbooks. Denials of racism often accompany racist and nationalist discourse, preempting observations of racism. The study finds that in representations of Canada or Canadians, English language texts minimize and downplay racism in Canada’s past and present while problematically and uncritically constructing Canadians as committed to multiculturalism and ethnic and racial diversity. The authors echo the call made by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission for antiracist education and education materials that speak frankly of racism in Canadian history. Cette analyse critique du discours porte sur le déni du racisme dans des descriptions du Canada et des Canadiens tirées de manuels de langue anglaise. Les dénis du racisme accompagnent souvent le discours raciste et nationaliste, empêchant ainsi la reconnaissance du racisme. Cette étude a trouvé que dans leurs représentations du Canada ou des Canadiens, les manuels de langue anglais minimisent ou amoindrissent les cas de racisme dans le passé et le présent tout en proposant, de manière problématique et incontestée, une vision des Canadiens comme étant attachés au multiculturalisme et à la diversité ethnique et raciale. Les auteurs répètent l’appel de la Commission de vérité et de réconciliation pour un enseignement et du matériel pédagogique antiracistes qui dévoilent ouvertement le racisme dans l’histoire canadienne.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.008 | 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 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".