MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910259574 · doi:10.1080/03626784.2018.1546540

Curriculum against the state: Sylvia Wynter, the human, and futures of curriculum studies

2019· article· en· W2910259574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathan Snaza

Bibliographic record

VenueCurriculum Inquiry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumSociologyRacializationHumanismGender studiesAestheticsEnvironmental ethicsLawPedagogyPolitical scienceRace (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At stake in contemporary US racial tensions is a struggle over the meaning of being “human.” By drawing on black feminist theories of being human as verb, and minority discourse critiques of humanism, the paper links racialization to apparatuses of humanization that emerge in early modernity including slavery, colonization, capitalism and environmental devastation. This paper takes up Sylvia Wynter’s differentiation between the human and man to examine recent critical public pedagogy projects – especially the public syllabus projects emerging around the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO; the Charleston, SC church bombing; the Idle No More movement in Canada, and the movement to stop the pipeline construction in Standing Rock, ND. The examination attends to how the “human” has been defined as a being with a race, and to how this definition of being “human” operates in the service of white supremacy. What the syllabus projects really requires of us, then, is not a curriculum geared toward the lesson that black and Indigenous citizens are humans too, but a collective grappling with the need for new ways of being human– ones not defined by whiteness, ones that can only be articulated in common.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations31
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurriculum InquirySame topicPosthumanist Ethics and ActivismFrench-language works237,207