Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, institutions of higher education are deeply rooted in colonial systems of knowledge production, institutionalized racism, and Eurocentric academic traditions. Despite the dismantling of formal legal barriers, Black disabled students continue to be marginalized by the legacies of racism and ableism embedded in academic policies, prevailing attitudes, and institutional cultures. Though there has been significant research focused on understanding the specific barriers faced by disabled students in higher education, much research is still needed on the intersecting challenges encountered by Black disabled women. This paper critically evaluates the essay Being Black and Disabled in University (Métraux, 2023) which draws on a study from Joy Banks, & Michael S. Hughes (2013), and responds to it within a Canadian context, employing a Black feminist disability studies framework. By integrating statistics and findings from the report on The Intersection of Blackness & Disability in Canada (Anderson, 2020) alongside the theoretical insights of Black feminist scholars and disability scholars, this paper foregrounds the nuanced realities of Black disabled students in higher education and advocates for systemic change so that we may implement tangible strategies to better support their experiences and academic outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".