Investigating Reconciliation: A study into the decolonial potential of Reconciliation projects in the Canadian academic literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis analyses and provides insight on the problem of dissonance in the Canadian reconciliation literature.Reconciliation touches legal, political, sociological, economical, and other contexts where it "fluctuates in its meaning" (Grafton and Melancon, 2020: 140).Experts in the field address this dissonance by including perspectives of the concept in a dialogical basketweaving process (Tully and Burrows, 2018: 11), where the limits of each perspective are carefully analysed and debated.This thesis contributes to the basket weaving process by analyzing the reconciliation literature from the perspective of the decoloniality theoretical model (Quijano, Mignolo, Walsh), a perspective that has seldom been used in the Canadian context.Importantly, this model identifies structures through which coloniality operates -namely the Eurocentric control over Knowledge, Governance, Economy and Humanity and the simultaneous disavowals of Indigenous alternatives.The results identify conceptions of reconciliation that are inconsistent with decolonization and proposes next steps for the basket weaving process, an important input to address the problem of dissonance.Cette thse analyse et fournit des claircissements sur le problme de la dissonance dans la littrature canadienne sur la rconciliation.La rconciliation touche des contextes juridiques, politiques, sociologiques, conomiques et autres o il "fluctue dans sa signification" (Grafton et Melancon, 2020 : 140).Les experts dans ce domaine abordent cette dissonance en incluant les perspectives du concept dans un processus dialogique de 'Basket weaving' (Tully et Burrows, 2018 : 11), o les limites de chaque perspective sont soigneusement analyses et dbattues.Cette thse contribue au processus de Basket weaving en analysant la littrature sur la rconciliation sous l'angle du modle thorique de la dcolonialit (Quijano, Mignolo, Walsh), une perspective rarement utilise dans le contexte canadien.Ce modle identifie les structures par lesquelles la colonialit opre - savoir le contrle eurocentrique sur la connaissance, la gouvernance, l'conomie et l'humanit, ainsi que le dni simultan des alternatives autochtones.Les rsultats identifient des conceptions de la rconciliation qui sont incompatibles avec la dcolonisation et propose les prochaines tapes pour le processus de Basket weaving, une contribution importante pour adresser le problme de dissonance.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".