Unsettling concepts: critical conceptual literacy and the development of Canadian subjects in the humanities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis works to reveal and disrupt continuities in the re/production of normative national Canadian subjects through a development of "critical conceptual literacy". Chapter II considers how the concept of "reasonable accommodation" in debates around multiculturalism figures people into the production of racialized, national and moral subjects. Chapter III explores "homonationalism" where certain gay citizen-subjects collude through gay rights discourse with the production of normative Canadian national subjects in larger discourses of "cultural and civic integration." Chapter IV proposes and contextualizes a CEGEP Humanities' course outline following this thesis's framework and methodology. By defining and exploring the practice of developing a "critical conceptual literacy" in the Humanities, this thesis asks: What are concepts like "citizenship" already saying about us? How are other concepts shaping "citizenship" as a worldview? And how do these concepts constitute us as subjects in the Humanities?
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 | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.112 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".