An Indigenous Feminist Reading Praxis for Imagining Anti-Colonial Futurities: Honouring the Spirit and Intent of Katherena Vermette’s Writings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conceptualize Indigenous literatures as integral tools for supporting teachers on their journeys toward truth and reconciliation. As such, we intentionally offer our work as a pedagogical guide for introducing Indigenous Children’s and Young Adult Literatures (ICYAL) in secondary level English courses, asserting that the delivery of such works must be taught in ways that align with anti-racist praxis, acknowledge varied experiences of racism, sexism, and gender-based violences, and promote liberatory thinking. Indeed, while Indigenous literatures are excellent pedagogical tools to engage conversations about social justice and anti-Indigenous racism, they must be paired with key lessons that dismantle harmful, disrespectful and racist narratives. We consider the pedagogical possibilities highlighted through the relationship between anti-colonial literacies and Indigenous futurities by focusing on a relational analysis of Vermette’s novels The Break (2016), The Strangers (2021) and The Circle (2023). These novels bring to life fictional experiences that may resonate and offer what Dian Million (2009) refers to as a felt sense of familiarity for many Indigenous readers. For non-Indigenous readers, Vermette explained her intention is to promote empathy by sharing experiences through stories. We see this as a call for a relational reading praxis that moves from writing as witness to reading as witness. Vermette’s statement “I realized I could write what I see” (Hanson, 2020, p. 56), demonstrates the power behind giving voice to what she sees in her Winnipeg hometown and Métis community as a way to promote social change.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".