MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Unsettling the Future by Uncovering the Past: Decolonizing Academic Libraries and Librarianship

2019· article· en· W2921703829 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousLibrary scienceCurriculumCommissionPolitical scienceColonialismSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is at an interesting point in its history, where the atrocious assimilation practices that were in place until the mid-1990s are being acknowledged in the hopes for a better relationship between Canada’s Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. Both the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report, and the Canadian Federation of Library Associations/Federation Canadienne des Associations de Bibliotheques (CFLA/FCAB)’s report from its Truth and Reconciliation Committee (n.d.) recognize the significant role of education needed to address changes. Where do academic libraries fit into this? I first discuss the colonial history of libraries, as extensions of education institutions, followed by a look at how library and information science (LIS) curriculum falls short in preparing students for working with Indigenous peoples and Indigenous resources. Finally, I examine how libraries can decolonize their services. Canadian academic library staff cannot continue to be so ill-equipped to serve Indigenous students and faculty.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.054
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.289 · 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