Identity, Belonging and Agency: A Transformative Development Framework for Global Africans/Black Peoples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Who am I? 2. Where do I belong? 3. What am I called to? These three questions represent the narrative shifts that are the outcomes of the Identity/Belonging/Agency (IBA) transformative development framework. The IBA framework emerged from the author’s critical reflections on fiction reading and dialogues in 12+ community conversations to explore everyday global African/Black experiences. It responds to the self-inquiry: How do global Africans/Black peoples experience developmental transformation in the context of social marginality? It conceptualizes that the key developmental tasks of global Africans/Black peoples lies in claiming identity through differentiation from dominant narratives of marginality, belonging through locating self-in-society and community, and agency through a focus on self-in-transcendence. The IBA framework is proposed as core to understanding how global Africans/Black peoples, and perhaps other socially constructed racialized groups, can choose to move from marginality to personal as well as social transformation through their agency.
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 | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".