MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390750875 · doi:10.1080/14927713.2023.2295327

Racism and black male student-athlete experiences in a Canadian University

2024· article· en· W4390750875 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Teshawn Smikle, Dawn E. Trussell

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure/Loisir · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRacismAthletesFootballWhite (mutation)Black maleHistorically black colleges and universitiesPsychologyCollege athleticsGender studiesSociologyHigher educationPolitical scienceMedicineLawPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates anti-Black racism and the experiences of Black male student-athletes. Specifically, using counter-stories we examine Teshawn’s experiences as a Black male former student-athlete on the varsity football team. In doing so, we also draw on the experiences of other Black student-athletes through a publicly commissioned report detailing incidents of anti-Black racism at the same university. The first composite counter-story ‘Get Out of the Drill!’ highlights racism by the white coaches and the implications for Black student-athletes in their current and future athletic opportunities. The second story, ‘Don’t Listen to Them. Block the Noise!’ highlights racism by the white coaches and white teammates and the negative implications it has on the Black male student-athletes’ academic success. Finally, the third story ‘Racist Jokes and Slurs are Never-ending’ emphasizes the declining mental health and fatigue of Black male student-athletes as reports of racism are ignored and mishandled by the institution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0510.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure/LoisirSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207