Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past two decades, pressing questions around childhood, age, difference, and power have traversed the multidisciplinary study of childhood, and have come to overlap increasingly with writings on colonialism. While children remain relatively under-analyzed across this scholarship, children and notions of childhood are always implicated in colonialism and its vestiges. Moreover, legacies of colonialism shape the images of children who dominate headlines today, from cruel policies which separate migrant children from their families at the United States—Mexico border, to Israel’s continued assault on Gaza and the deliberate targeting of Palestinian children, to young climate activists who have mobilized around the globe. Our special issue explores questions around colonialism and childhood, and specifically their processes of racialization; and argues for a general practice of decolonizing the study of childhood. The authors—representing several disciplines and regions—have contributed essays which cover two broad themes. The first three articles speak to histories of colonialism and their entwinement with childhood, and the challenges actors face in attempting to reckon with those histories. The next three articles take up discussions concerning childhood as a colonialist racialized concept, and pose questions about who is deserving of care and whose care should be recognized as good for children. Our queries recognize the important work already being done by childhood studies scholars, invite newer researchers to the field to consider childist concerns, and welcome all to imagine futures beyond our present crises.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".