Pedagogy as encounter in the first-year academic writing course at the intersection of race and colonialism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a growing emphasis on shifting conversations about race and colonialism from “safe” to “brave” spaces, aiming to engage students in discussions on race amid global upheaval and neocolonial violence. This social justice pedagogical approach foregrounds students’ lived experiences as sources of knowledge and truth-making. Building on Canadian sociological research, I explore an alternative teaching approach for first-year academic writing classes that emphasizes the relationship between multiracial students’ lived experiences and institutions and disciplinary practices that perpetuate racial inequalities. Drawing on Naeem Inayatullah’s method of deriving pedagogical principles from encounters with students, I analyze key areas where colonial and moral imperatives are embedded in writing curricula. I propose that an effective counter-narrative to dominant pedagogical models involves integrating antiracism as a literacy skill in first-year courses through a pedagogy of encounter. This approach challenges the moral regulation inherent in first-year writing courses, creating a foundation for discussing race and colonialism in a low-stakes environment. Using an antiracist memoir after conducting a class poll, I explore threshold concepts which engage students with race and colonialism in literacy education, while also fostering the transfer of academic writing skills across disciplines, particularly in the social sciences.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".