Publishing Children Books by Minority Voices in Canada: The Case of Groundwood Books
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada today the children’s book publishing scene is quite different from what it used to be in the 1970s and 1980s. Even if most publishers are small and rely heavily on federal grants the sheer range of publishing houses which feature the multicultural composition of the country for children and young adult readers is vast. The pendulum covers houses such as Annick Press, Fifth house, Second Story, or Theytus Books. The situation forty years ago though was radically different. In those days one of the groundbreaking houses was Groundwood Books. In this article we intend to look into the origins of the project, the wider political, social and cultural context, and three works by minority voices which clearly marked the publishing house’s profile and aspirations (Paul Yee’s Tales from Gold Mountain, Thomas King’s controversial A Coyote Columbus Story and Shirley Sterling’s My Name is Seepeetza). Our aim thus is to afford insight into the part played by Groundwood Books in fostering a new poetics in children’s books within the framework of Canada’s nation-building process.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".