In pursuit of a Canadian identity : the creation of national colonial narratives through national historic sites in Nova Scotia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within Canada, a variety of national colonial narratives are present which represent it as a welcoming, multicultural, and just country. These narratives do not include the histories of a variety of minority or marginalized nations, notably those of the \nFirst Nations, Métis, and Inuit. Canada’s national colonial narratives have been \nconstructed mainly through avenues such as National Historic Sites (NHS). This thesis argues that Canada’s national colonial narratives are reliant on a version of Canadian \nhistory, which centres, sanitizes, and romanticizes the history of French and British \ncolonisation in Canada while sidelining or ignoring Indigenous and other marginalized \nhistories. Recognition of these realities would destabilize the legitimacy of the Canadian \nstate and require the settler Canadian population to confront a variety of uncomfortable \nrealities. This argument is forwarded through an analysis of two NHS in Nova Scotia, \nCanada, (the Fortress of Louisbourg NHS, and the Halifax Citadel NHS). The versions of \nhistory presented at these NHS create Canadian national colonial narratives and have real world impacts, particularly on Indigenous peoples.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.053 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".