MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dialogic Potential in the Shadow of Canada's Indian Residential School System

2012· article· en· W832645221 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick Belanger

Bibliographic record

VenueArgumentation and Advocacy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogicArgumentation theorySociologyNegotiationArgument (complex analysis)InjusticeIndigenousCompromiseEpistemologyPolitical scienceLawSocial sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada's 2008 apology to Indigenous peoples addressed a history of institutionalized racism and aggressive assimilation. Grounded in an ongoing experiment in multinational compromise, the event serves as a case study for the capacities of public argument to motivate productive inter-community exchange in contexts animated by power asymmetries and historical injustice. Acknowledging the limits of an education-based approach to reconciliation, I offer a twofold argument. First, the apology was a crucial (albeit partial) step towards fostering conditions amenable to dialogic (but still strategic) negotiations regarding a common future. Second, such negotiations may be productively conceptualized through the theory of coalescent argumentation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArgumentation and AdvocacySame topicRhetoric and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207