“Now I See the Importance of History”: Tracing the Geneaology of Hip Hop, Young People and the Academy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation analyses the development of hip hop’s use in research and pedagogy in academic researching institutions. In particular, my research traces scholarly/ journal documentation of hip hop as an example of youth identity culture, taking seriously the ways that research has historicized and constructed the relationship between hip hop and Black youth over time. \n\nI reviewed over 2000 documents using a Systematic Integrated Literature Review (SILR) whereby I manually coded academic peer-reviewed journals according to specific exclusionary criteria. Ultimately, 414 documents were collected, coded, and analysed according to various abundance and variety criteria such as keyword frequency, publishing year, journal, field of study, and methodology used. The trends and patterns that emerged formed the basis of my thematic analysis. \n\nThrough this comprehensive review, terms such as Culturally Relevant Pedagogy, Identity, Urban, Marginality, and Resistance emerged as leading concepts that often explain Black youth positionality in hip hop culture. \n\nThis dissertation asserts that the terms and methods used to articulate an image of Black youth identity can lead to particular outcomes for how such youth are imagined in academic spaces. There is confusion and complexity in the use of terminology regarding youth attitudes and behaviours, and this complexity often results in similar ideological narratives being produced time and time again.\n\nMy work joins with other scholarship that takes seriously the links between culture and power, and it highlights how academic and ideological legacies can be furthered and extended to reflect the young people at the centre of the research. The findings illustrate in part how institutional research can conceptualize, frame, reify, and position young people.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".