Bibliographic record
Abstract
This narrative-based study highlights how tenure at U.S.-based historically white universities normalizes anti-Black racism. Centering storytelling approaches, the article situates the author’s positionality and critical race theory-informed methods. After clarifying anti-Blackness across higher education institutions, a non-binary Black academic’s tenure narratives are presented. Critical race theory’s tenets of the permanence of racism and interest convergence guide analyses, clarifying how tenure represented rejections of race-forward teaching and race-focused, arts-based, community-centric scholarship, despite how colleagues—and the institution more broadly—consistently celebrated such work. Findings reinforce how anti-Black racism are structured into the very definitions of academia, thereby normalizing intersectional racism and the systemic exclusion of creative, community-centric Black academics. An additional finding challenges the extractive nature of historically white universities’ false celebrations of diversity as reinforcing white interests. The article concludes with hopes for a systems-wide transformation of higher education towards Black affirming spaces and processes.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".