Rethinking conceptions of educational leadership within a First Nations setting in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide to First and non-First Nation educators, scholars, and policy makers alternative perspectives that can reshape research on educational leadership in First Nation education with new imaginings that question fundamentally the cultural-political-economic-space defined by Euro-centred notion of modernity. Design/methodology/approach – The paper addresses two questions in dealing with issues of conceptions of educational leadership in a First Nations setting: first, in what socio-cultural paradigm and epistemic framework, should the paper ground the view of relations among persons and between them and their environment, in a way that opens up spaces for prospects for action of those located outside a Euro-centric epistemic and ontological field; second, how could this paradigm assist us in formulating a conception of educational leadership that increases the leverage of First Nations education in constructing alternative sociocultural and educational worlds not grounded in the Eurocentric modernity? Findings – For non-First Nation educators, power brokers, and policy makers who want to create alliances with First Nation people, this paper outlines the necessity to consider cross-cultural dialogue about conceptions of educational leadership as an “opportunity to challenge conventional assumptions about knowledge, power, and a sense of place” (Marker, 2006, p. 21). Originality/value – The originality of this paper resides in its presentation of alternative conceptual horizons for educational leadership, horizons that acknowledge power inequities between mainstream societies and institutions on the one hand and First Nations peoples and their institutions on the other.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".