Book Review. The Rhizome of Blackness: A critical ethnography of Hip-Hop Culture, Language, Identity, and the Politics of Becoming.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Against the backdrop of a neoliberal fixation on standardized assessments and results-based management, “The rhizome of blackness: A critical ethnography of Hip-Hop culture, language, identity and the politics of becoming ” by CIESC member Awad Ibrahim, provides a much-needed reminder about the infinitely complex nature of Black identity in North America. With daily updates about tragic murders of Black youth in the U.S. and Canada, this examination of Blackness is timely. This book is not situated within mainstream comparative education, but provides a post-structuralist challenge to the functionalist paradigm that dominates much of the field. As Peggy McIntosh (1989) says, I must begin by “unpacking my own knapsack ” by acknowledging my discomfort--as a White, Western woman--about reviewing a book which so incisively critiques the deeply problematic colonial construction of Blackness. Ibrahim begins with his own journey of “becoming Black”, asking the question: “As a continental African living in North America,
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.011 |
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".