Persistently Present, Yet Invisible? Exploring the Experiences of High-Achieving Black Students in the Greater Toronto Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through employing critical race theory, seen-invisibility, and circuits of dispossession as theoretical frames, this article complicates discourses around equity and Black student achievement by examining the underexplored experiences of high-achieving Black Canadian students in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Drawing on focus group data with four adolescent participants, the study finds that they experienced violent forms of racialization in their educational environments through a lack of physical, social, and intellectual space to exist as both Black and high-achieving. This rendered them persistently present due to their race, yet invisible in the perceptions of their intellect. Central to this article is an articulation, unpacking, and thus granular analysis of the particular ways that racialization can operate within education systems to still marginalize Black students and erect complex barriers––even when they demonstrate strong academic performance. These emerging insights inform a need for a broader and more holistic understanding of Black Canadian student experiences and a rethinking of intervention and resistance strategies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".