Whiteness, Canadian university athletic administration, and anti-racism leadership: ‘A bunch of white haired, white dudes in the back rooms’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper theorises ‘whiteness’ in relation to systems of power, leadership, and oppression within post-secondary sport athletic departments in Ontario, Canada. Using results from the Ontario University Athletics (OUA) Anti-Racism Project, we position whiteness as a significant and unavoidable obstacle to productive anti-racism leadership and labour within university athletics. While many Canadian university athletic departments have publicly embraced a call to anti-racism practice and policy, progress too-often remains contingent on largely white, male, and older leadership groups making decisions surrounding instances of racism that they often have no history personally experiencing, witnessing, or most concerningly, handling professionally. Examples from the project include administrators who often have more than 20-years-experience referencing ‘blindness’, naiveté, or not knowing where to look as reasons for viewing racism as a cursory or circumscribed problem, or as an issue not on the same scale as other athletic departments have attempted to tackle (e.g. sexual violence and concussion). We argue that these denials of the existence of racism work to reproduce the dominant structures of power, destabilise efforts for education or policy initiatives and maintain the oppression, racial hierarchies and marginalisation of racialised people within collegiate athletics.
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 | 0.018 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".