An Example of Distortion in Turkish Social Studies and History Textbooks: Slavery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focuses on how issues of slavery are discussed in the social studies and history textbooks in Turkey. Atotal of 16 textbooks were examined. 7 of these books were published by the Ministry of National Education andothers by various private publishers. A qualitative research design is adopted and the data were classified accordingto the themes that emerged during the process of the researchers' familiarity with the subject. The findings show thatslavery issues are either distorted or omitted in textbooks. The first one of the distortions and omissions in thetextbooks is that slavery is reflected as if it were only experienced in western societies. Secondly, the textbookspresent an image that Islam banned slavery and hence, it is implied that slavery did not take place in Turkish history.Another distortion or deficiency is the presentation of slavery as a problem of distant past. Finally, slavery ispresented as a situation only black people were subjected. The findings required a two-way discussion. Therefore,firstly, identity issues are discussed within the framework of social identity theory. Finally, suggestions were madeon what to do in these and similar situations in the textbooks.
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".