Reflections on The Remember Me Project: Queen’s University’s Black Past and the AfroWomanist Sankofa Archive to Our Future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How does one endeavour to recover history that has been intentionally hidden, erased, and forgotten? In what ways can the ethics of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) be applied within archival processes? In this article, I highlight the work I recently completed under the supervision of the Director of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Indigeneity (EDII) at Queen’s University as an “Afrofuturist” Graduate Research Fellow in a project titled The Remember Me Project: Black Historic Lives and Our Future(s) at Queen’s University. I focus on one poem from my collection titled, “Alfie or Did I Really Do Alright?” I problematize the now infamous figure of Alfred “Alfie” Pierce, a Black male employee of Queen’s Athletics department to problematize the ways Black stories are forgotten, lost, and devalued within academic institutions. In simultaneously speaking back to the politics of whose stories are worthy of remembrance at Queen’s, the horrors of “Alfie’s” story, and the difficulties involved in Black archival recovery, I introduce my intervention “the AfroWomanist Sankofa Archive” as an interdisciplinary framework constructed as a guideline for African-heritage peoples to utilize while navigating dis-empowering research material involving African archival information. I end with some recommendations for our Afrofuture.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".