Framing Possibilities: Representations of Black Student Athletes in Toronto Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article draws upon a weekly feature in the Toronto Star newspaper, the “High School Report,” to explore the representations of black male student athletes over the school year 2003/2004. These media representations contribute to an understanding of the wider social reality of student athletes. Our investigation points to the fact that the media present black male students compared to their white counterparts as giving priority to athletics over academics. By ignoring the structural inequities they face in schools and society, the media contribute to a popular discourse which frames the social and educational possibilities of black male students in limiting ways. Cet article tire ses renseignements de l'article hebdomadaire du journal Toronto Star: le Rapport sur les écoles secondaires “High School Report,” , pour examiner la représentation des athlètes-étudiants noirs pendant l'année scolaire 2003-2004. Ces représentations dans la presse contribuent à la compréhension d'une réalité plus large dans la société pour les athlètes-étudiants. Notre examen pointe au fait que la presse représente les athlètes-étudiants noirs comme plus inclinés aux sports qu'aux études scolaires que les athlètes-étudiants blancs. En ignorant les iniquités structurelles auxquelles les athlètes-étudiants doivent faire face à l'école comme dans la société, la presse se donne au discours populaire qui encadre les possibilités sociales et éducationnelles des étudiants noirs d'une façon limitée.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".