Le handicap comme concept colonial : le discours manquant de la culture dans les conceptualisations des enfants autochtones handicape·es
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explore le concept de handicap à travers la lentille des études critiques du handicap dans le but de comprendre le positionnement des ontologies autochtones dans le discours dominant des personnes handicapées au Canada. Il s’appuie sur les connaissances inhérentes des communautés autochtones (principalement anishinaabek) grâce à une intégration des connaissances émanant des récits et des relations avec les ainés autochtones, les gardiens du savoir et les membres de la communauté. Jumelées à la littérature universitaire, les perspectives autochtones illustrent les points de vue dichotomiques qui positionnent les autochtones, le plus souvent des enfants, comme étant des « personnes handicapées » au sein des établissements non autochtones, sans égard à leur désignation individuelle. Une telle catégorisation suggère que l’étiquette du handicap est une construction coloniale qui entre en conflit avec les perspectives autochtones d’appartenance à la communauté et perpétue les pratiques d’assimilation qui, à leur tour, entretiennent les préjudices coloniaux.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".