Pedagogy of Discomfort: Mapping Family History in Prince Edward Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, postcolonial theorists and activists are urging people to educate themselves on the legacy of colonialism and on different perspectives in the history of Canada. As a white person in Canadian society, I am a beneficiary of colonialism and, as such, I recognize my privileged identity in Canada. Through artistic, academic and writing practices, I pursue personal decolonization objectives. From 1909 to 1947, a community of Compton relatives prospered from unsustainable land-use practices, including operating one of the largest sawmills on Prince Edward Island at the time. Using research-creation methodology, I critically contemplate this family history by creating woven cartographic tapestries of the land my ancestors exploited. Depicting the settler-altered landscape in my tapestries serves to present truths of colonialism in a visual way. Since the arrival of European settlers, dominant land-use practices have favoured profitability over sustainability. As an educator with an environmental and postcolonial perspective, I promote a different kind of relationship with our world, in which economic gain and sustainability are of equal importance. The title “Pedagogy of Discomfort” refers to both the difficult knowledge of colonialism and to the physical demands of making textile art. Despite the discomfort in weaving, I found the process meditative and a time to listen to Indigenous-led audiobooks and podcasts. For me, this fostered a listening practice that helped me better understand the biases and omissions in dominant narratives of Canadian heritage. By considering family history in this context, I am implicating myself in an effort to take responsibility and effect change as an educator.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".