INTERROGATING "AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT " AND THE DIASPORAN REALITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The &dquo;development&dquo; obituary has been written if not already read (see also Sachs, 1992). The valorization of international devel-opment is today justifiably replaced with the pillorization of so-called development. In fact, it does not require any great sense of intellectual imagination to accede that international development as we ’ have all come to know and understand has met with disap-pointment in Africa. Today, the euphoria of international develop-ment has worn thin in the minds of many local peoples. This is, in part, because so-called development has come at a high human, ecological, political, and ethical cost to Africans. The development agenda has literally put to shame the assumption of innocence. Development, with an emphasis on materialization/materialism, has been uneven, uncertain, and inequitable. Any economic gains have been spurious at best and disproportionately channeled to the already wealthy segments of society. What has been institutionalized as development has actually been an economic boom to trans-national corporate capital interests in Africa. Perhaps, what is dis-turbing is that meanwhile, the social, spiritual, emotional, and psy-chological aspects of development remain largely unaddressed. INTERROGATING DEVELOPMENT These observations are not merely rhetorical. As argued else-where (Dei, 1993), it is incumbent on those engaged in development This article originally was presented at the annual conference of the Canadian
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".