Exploring Historical and Contemporary Academic Disparities: A Comparative Study of Black and Non-Black Nova Scotians
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, concerns persist regarding the academic underperformance among historically marginalized racial and ethnic groups. Extensive research has been conducted on the academic achievements of Aboriginal communities, but there’s a noticeable lack of focus on longstanding Afro-descendant populations. Our study aims to address this gap by examining discrepancies in numeracy and overall academic performance, particularly between Black and non-Black residents of Nova Scotia. Utilizing historical census data, we identified a small-to-medium-sized numeracy gap between European and African Nova Scotians, measuring about one-third of a standard deviation, prevalent in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Furthermore, contemporary data from the 21st century reveal a gap in academic and cognitive test scores between African and other Nova Scotians of approximately half a standard deviation. We analyze these findings in the context of existing research on racial and ethnic academic disparities in the Americas.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it