Addressing the Ground of Anti-Black Racism Social Work in Canada: Afrocentric Education and the United Nations International Decades for People of African Descent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dominant epistemologies, methodologies, and ontologies within education and Social Work remain deeply Eurocentric and often fail to account for the lived realities of Black communities. These gaps contribute to negligence, discriminatory practice, and harmful outcomes. This study draws on African/Black Studies and Social Work to investigate the presence, engagement, and utilization of Afrocentric perspectives across Canada during the first United Nations Decade for People of African Descent. We explore how Afrocentricity informs Social Work pedagogy and practice, particularly in relation to equity and anti-Black racism. Using interviews with Black scholars and practitioners in three provinces, the analysis highlights how Afrocentric frameworks shape teaching, identity formation, community engagement, and advocacy. Findings show that Afrocentric curriculum and pedagogy offer essential pathways for advancing equity, strengthening anti-Black racism initiatives, and expanding more justice-oriented approaches in education and the social sciences. This study underscores the need for institutional commitment to Afrocentric knowledge, community-led initiatives, and systemic transformation in the upcoming Second Decade.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".