Exploring the Experiences of a Small Group of Saskatchewan Neophyte Aboriginal Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to explore the experiences of a small group of Aboriginal neophyte teachers in Saskatchewan, Canada. Part of a larger study, this research used a mixed method approach for data collection in which 18 Aboriginal beginning teachers completed a survey (with Likert-scale items and open-ended questions) and an additional two Aboriginal beginning teachers participated in individual interviews. This study is a focused attempt to highlight the voices of the Aboriginal beginning teachers. Findings suggested that many participants had difficulty obtaining employment and identified family and friends as their core supports. Most participants felt challenged by their workload and a lack of supports to address the diverse needs of their students. Most participants found teaching to be rewarding and enjoyed the autonomy of their own classrooms. Many of the issues raised by the participants can be addressed by placing a greater focus on an Aboriginal epistemology based on the concept of community. To promote Aboriginal teacher recruitment, employment, and retention rates, it is essential that neophyte teachers are provided with employment assistance, mentorship opportunities, and curricular and unit plan resources. Keywords: neophyte/beginning teachers; preservice teacher education, mixed-methodology
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".