Repairing the Fractures: Steps Forward in Building Bridges Across the Racial Divide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disconnections and distrust between the United States educational system and Black communities have existed for generations. Innovative approaches to dismantle this cyclical injustice are needed. For this reason, we sought to examine three tenets of Black othermothering; advocacy, relatedness, care and concern, and how they served as a bridge to engage Black students and families with educators through cultural brokering. Othermothering is critical to the pedagogy of Black teaching and contributed to the success of African American students prior to the 1954 ruling of Brown v. Board of Education. Following desegregation, Black students began performing disproportionately lower than their White counterparts. Additionally, 40,000 Black teachers and administrators lost their jobs and, to date, have not rebounded from this travesty in education (Farinde et al., 2016). While efforts are made to attract and retain qualified candidates who reflect the demographics of the student population, attention must be directed to ensure that ALL educators, regardless of cultural/racial match, are responsive and invested in optimal education delivery which includes increasing their relational capacity. To this end, white teachers in this study explained that othermothering improved their connection to Black students and families through advocacy, relatedness, and care and concern. Black parents/guardians equally expressed their desire for this essential support. These findings suggest the need for increased cultural representation within our schools, a greater understanding of the importance of holistic and equitable methods of inclusion for Black students and their families, and the need for Transformative school leaders to establish cultural connectedness in their school systems. This work focuses on fostering individual evolvement that collaboratively moves educators from a state of racialized submersion to a transcendent identity. Through this individual growth, schools can bridge connections with Black students and families. One strategy to innovatively strengthen this connection is through the inclusion of an othermother.
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 | 0.026 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.040 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.030 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.004 |
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".