MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Global Injustices of Colonial Schools: Educational Reparations and Representations of the Human

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404572466 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin D. Scherrer, Brandon Folson, Chevy Eugene, Ellie Ernst, Tinesh Indrarajah, Tavis D. Jules, Madeleine Lutterman, Anastasia Toland

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Race Theory in Education
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismPolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drawing connections between Indigenous boarding schools in North America and the expansion of colonial schooling worldwide, this chapter conceptualizes methods of re-engagement with the topic of reparations for communities who have been subjected to the consequences of colonial schooling. Models of colonial schooling instill education practices aimed at enforcing the assimilation of populations into dominant cultures while reinforcing globalized racializing hierarchies. The epistemic violence central to the conceptualization of the colonial school is a key component of this colonial technology and is reproduced within modern education systems throughout the Global South. Moving toward the interconnected articulation of reparative material and epistemic justice in education for American Indian and African American communities in the United States and post-colonial communities worldwide, the chapter aims to create openings in comparative and international education for addressing the colonial residues within modern education on local and global levels, recentering the foundational terms by which schools function and the solidarities necessary for repair.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.027
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.409 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCritical Race Theory in EducationFrench-language works237,207