Amanda Gebhard, Sheelah McLean, and Verna St. Denis, eds., White Benevolence: Racism and Colonial Violence in the Helping Professions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The strength of this book lies in its thorough reading of documents in both English and German to provide a picture of the complex nature of German and Germanness in Ontario during this time period.At times it was challenging to read as Bryce took us back and forth in time, such that one could stumble on the order of events if not reading closely.Additionally, the treatment of German Lutheranism was confusing in its nomenclature.As a Lutheran myself, familiar with the differences between the two Lutheran church bodies in Canada, I still had to stop and reread as to whether Bryce was discussing the Canada Synod or the Canada District.Anyone using the book for historical research is well advised to keep careful notes.On a theoretical level, I found that Bryce sometimes attributed more agency to children than I felt could be justified.However, while I felt that aspect was challenging to justify through an interpretation of historical documents, his overall presentation of a nuanced reading and interpretation of Germanness in Ontario provides valuable insights to ground future research in German history, education, and religious practices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".