Literacy and Community 1 “Helping Our People”: The Role of Literacies in Mediating Community among Sudanese Refugees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper illustrates the ways in which the literacy practices of southern Sudanese refugee youth transacted with issues of identity, community, and diaspora. Literacy mediated community through practices centered around schooling, religion, interpersonal communication, and community participation for these youth. Themes of orphanhood and community emerged in the study, illustrating the importance of literacy to Sudanese identity and to maintaining community in diaspora. The paper offers implications for literacy instruction in formal schooling for refugees. “Helping Our People”: The Role of Literacies in Mediating Community among Sudanese Refugees This paper illustrates the ways in which the literacy practices of southern Sudanese refugee youth—the so-called “Lost Boys of Sudan”—transacted with issues of Sudanese community and identity for these youth. There are more than 17,000 southern Sudanese refugees living in the United States today (Bok, 2003); of these, approximately 1,000 live in Michigan, and about a quarter of Michigan’s Sudanese refugees come from the group known as the “Lost Boys”. These youth, primarily boys, were orphaned by the 20-year-old civil war in the Sudan, made a grueling journey on foot across Africa, lived for years in the Kakuma Refugee Camp in Kenya, and eventually were resettled in American communities. The purpose of this case study was to explore the various ways in which this community utilized and transformed literac(ies) into culturally meaningful practices by incorporating issues surrounding language, culture, community and identity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".