Broadening the story: the beginnings of a peopleâs history of sport in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In The Twentieth Century: A People’s History, Howard Zinn (2003: x) asserts that “If history is to be creative, to anticipate a possible future without denying the past, it should, I believe, emphasize new possibilities by disclosing those hidden episodes of the past when, even if in brief flashes, people showed their ability to resist, to join together, occasionally to win.” The historiography of Canadian sport still privileges dominant institutions and mainstream sports/leagues, overlooking the experiences of many. The larger project of which this paper is a component takes up Zinn’s call, in an effort to (re)map the landscape of Canadian sport history and broaden our understanding of the ways in which people express themselves through sport and re-conceptualize the lived experiences of sport. The beginning of a People’s History of Canadian sport focused on the history of sport in African Nova Scotian communities, with particular attention paid to the community of Africville. Archives were consulted, oral history interviews were conducted, and privately held documents were accessed, while museum exhibits considered the public presentation of African Nova Scotian sport history. This paper attempts to bring some coherence to these diverse historical sources, but does so in consideration of the methodological challenges of such an effort, of trying to construct a narrative, and do justice to an under-told narrative, through empirical gaps. Moreover, it explores the theoretical questions of the historian’s outsider status within a community as well as who has ownership of this narrative and the right to tell it.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.073 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".