Viewing Education in Canada through an Intersectional Auto-Ethnographic Lens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Orality and Auto-ethnographySANKOFA: Adrinka symbol for the importance of learning from the past'At the bottom of patience, one finds heaven' ~ Ghanaian proverbAfricans believe in 'nommo ... the generative power of the spoken word' (Hamlet 1998: 91). Orality is not only a communication vehicle or a means to convey knowledge from generation to generation, but it is described by Maryam Nabavi as 'pedagogy that takes on many forms, including proverbs, praise-songs, storytelling, folklore, debates, poetry, fables, riddles, singing, myths and mythologies' (Nabavi 2006: 178). My people are from Ghana, West Africa. Ghanaians inherited from their ancestors a pictographic writing system called Adrinka, comprised of symbols often associated with a specific proverb rooted in the cultural experience. The Adrinka system of symbols acts to preserve and transmit the cultural values of our people, while proverbs constitute an important part of the Ghanaian oral tradition and their use is widespread as mini-stories conveying cultural wisdom, values and expectations. This rich oral and symbolic literary tradition has been core to the survival of my culture, its people and its community. Prefacing each section of this article is a symbol and proverb, which communicate an aspect of the themes discussed in that section.As a member of the African Diaspora, narrative processes resonate with me - I was raised relying on and celebrating oral forms of expression. Drawing on and telling my oral history was a way of 'finding voice against historical misrepresentations, and seeking empowerment' (Nabavi 2006: 179). Oral histories were popularised and theorised during the feminist movement to bring voice to the experiences of women 'in a culture that has traditionally relied on masculine interpretation' (Fontana and Frey 2005: 709). Today, narrative and autoethnographic approaches have emerged as ways to give voice to marginalised researchers and participants while providing communities with a deeper understanding of the meaning of these experiences (Williams et al. 2005).Auto-ethnographic and phenomenological methods of inquiry were employed in my study to uncover a deeper understanding and meaning of my experiences. With auto-ethnography, I placed myself at the centre of the research, emphasising reflexivity while stimulating deeper understanding and uncovering new meaning and appreciation of social and cultural dynamics (Ellis and Bochner 1996). It is a method of inquiry that connects 'the personal to the cultural' (Ellis and Bochner 2000: 740) and uses 'personal text as critical intervention in social, political and cultural life' (Jones 2005: 763). The auto-ethnographic method allowed me to remain true to an integrated view of myself where the 'self as researcher and the lived self are not separate' (Richardson 2000: 923-948). Audre Lorde said it best: 'If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive' (1984: 125). By studying my own marginalised identity and social location, the auto-ethnographic process facilitated my own resistance, transformation and liberation.NEA ONNIM NO SUA A, OHU: Andrinka symbol of knowledge and lifelong education'Knowledge is like a Baobab tree ... no one can encompass it with their hands' ~ Ghanaian proverbAmong the things that have always been important to Ghanaians is the value placed on education, knowledge acquisition and openness to learning, exemplified by the Adrinka symbol of knowledge, life-long education, and continued quest for knowledge and in the proverb: 'Knowledge is like a Baobab tree...no one can encompass it with their hands'. This fundamental value counters the racism inherent in characterisations of Black people as uninterested in and incapable of contributing to knowledge generation, learning and education.Canadian society and, by extension, its educational institutions have been shaped by Western European, Christian and Anglo-Saxon traditions, and their colonial, patriarchal and racist legacies continue to steep and affect the experiences of multiply marginalised Black individuals and students (Kobayashi and Johnson 2007: 3-16; Taylor et al. …
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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 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".