MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1914107919 · doi:10.7202/1071456ar

Educating for Cultural Survival in Nunavut: Why Haven’t We Learned from the Past?

2020· article· en· W1914107919 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePaideusis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenous cultureIndigenousDemiseCurriculumHavenArcticThe arcticHistoryEthnologySociologyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical sciencePedagogyLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a paper about the culture of the Inuit in the Nunavut Territory of the Canadian Arctic, and the role that education should take in preventing its slow dilution, demise, and loss. The measures to be taken are evident. Inuit philosophy (Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit) must be the framework, and Inuit must be in control, not only of policy and curricula, but also of the school system, the schools, and the classrooms. It can take decades for outsiders embedded in a different culture to communicate and see through an unfamiliar worldview. Inuit do not have the luxury of time to wait for this to happen. Non-Inuit need to understand what Inuit are saying, to appreciate what they aim to achieve, and then get out of the way. If this is not done, the Inuit culture will go the way of so many other Indigenous cultures that once flourished. It’s inconceivable that we non-Inuit Canadians are willing not only to watch this happen but continue to be the cause.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.238 · 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