MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The New People: Reading for Peoplehood in Métis Literatures

2016· article· en· W2607258434 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Adese

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in American Indian Literatures · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender studiesHistorySociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The New PeopleReading for Peoplehood in Métis Literatures Jennifer Adese (bio) While I was heavily involved in the Niagara Native community throughout my teenage years I had little sense of myself as Métis. I was born in North Vancouver, British Columbia, and spent the first few years of my life in a small town called Squamish, north of North Vancouver. My parents met at a party in the apartment building they both lived in in North Vancouver, and after marrying, they relocated to Squamish with their blended family. Neither of them was originally from the area. My dad moved to BC in the early 1970s from his hometown of Edmonton, Alberta, after a stint in the Royal Canadian Navy and took up working for the railway. My mother also moved to BC in the early 1970s from her hometown of St. Catharines, Ontario, where she had been born and adopted into an English Mennonite family. She traveled to BC at the invitation of her then-boyfriend, an architect, bringing with her her two children from her first marriage. My parents were not married long, and I was just over two years old when my father died. Shrouded in a veil of grief and despair, my mother did the only thing she could clearly think to do: she returned to her hometown with her children in tow and drew on the support of her family. Having been raised in St. Catharines meant that in many ways it was my home. Yet I was always keenly aware that I was not “from” there. My mother, as an adopted person, in spite of strong ties with her adoptive family, lacked a strong sense of connection to her hometown. In the absence of knowledge about her own birth family and history, she felt that it was important to provide me with as much connection to where I was born, and to my father’s family in Alberta, as she feasibly could so that I could grow up “knowing” who I was. My childhood sense of identity was therefore built by decoupage through the accumulation of [End Page 53] fragments of information from my mom. It was supplemented by fleeting contact with my grandma during her calls, letters, and visits from Edmonton to St. Catharines and numerous faded photographs of a life I had briefly been a part of yet could not remember. What stood out to me then, as it does now, is that words like “Cree” and “French” entered my vocabulary fairly early on as my mother sought to tell me “what” I was and as my grandma, when prodded, offered words like “breed” and “Scotch.” As I reached my early teenage years, I was drawn into programming at my high school for urban Native kids. Through my school’s Native Circle initiative and my growing connection with the wider urban Native community, my identity as a Native person crystallized, and other Native people around me encouraged me to identify myself as “Native” rather than continually referring to myself as “part Cree.” I had been so used to referring to myself in parts that it was a relief to begin to see myself as whole and, truly, as complete, and I took this rearticulated sense of myself very seriously. I remember the first time a well-meaning non-Native friend suggested that I read a book by a woman often referred to as a “Métis author,” a writer named Maria Campbell. When I looked at the book jacket and saw the title Halfbreed, I scoffed, “Why would I want to read that? I’m not Métis or half-anything, I’m Native!” In the wake of the formation of my identity as Native, I rebuked outsiders’ attempts to link myself to Campbell and her work for two reasons. First, I saw myself as a “whole” Native person, and that way of seeing myself was nurtured by the other members of the Native community around me. I struggled to assert this “whole” identity—meaning a way of understanding and expressing myself in mind, body, and spirit as a person who is marked by my completeness, not by a sense...

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0230.026
Scholarly communication0.0160.015
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in American Indian LiteraturesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207