Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume: Cet article propose une analyse comparative entre quatre livres pour la jeunesse consacres a l'Holocauste et les recits traditionnels («mainstream») du Canada; il tente egalement de preciser leur specificite par rapport aux ouvrages traitant de la Shoah publies a l'etranger. L'etude des elements relatifs a l'identite canadienne depasse la simple comparaison avec les caracteristiques essentielles des œuvres et des genres dominants. Elle souleve la question du Savoir, c'est-a-dire qu'elle aura chercher a decouvrir ce que les enfants canadiens doivent connaitre sur l'Holocauste. L'auteure de l'article devoile les aspects inquietants que peuvent presenter les livres sur l'Holocauste lorsqu'ils abordent la question de l'identite nationale et s'efforcent de situer les problemes relies a la Shoah dans un contexte canadien. Summary: This essay interrogates the relationship between Holocaust children's books and mainstream Canadian children's fiction. It considers what Canadian means in Holocaust children's books and whether Canadian-authored Holocaust children's books differ in any significant way from Holocaust children's books published outside Canada. It argues that questions about Canadian identity in Holocaust children's literature are provoked but not answered by the structural analysis provided by the list of shared characteristics of mainstream Canadian children's novels. Affirming that identity is also a matter of knowledge, the essay investigates what Canadian children are expected to know about the Holocaust. Through an analysis of four recently published books, the essay demonstrates the disturbing implications when children's books about the Holocaust also take on questions of Canadian identity and locate Holocaust issues in a contemporary Canadian setting. Three of the books are Canadian: Kathy Kacer's Clara's War , Sherie Posesorski's Escape Plans , and Marsha Forchuk Skrypuch's Hope's War ; one, Jackie French's Hitler's Daughter, is Australian.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".