Integrating the Self and the Spirit: Strategies for Aligning Qualitative Research Teaching with Indigenous Methods, Methodologies, and Epistemology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many universities internationally now make concerted efforts to promote curriculum development and classroom and campus cultures that recognize diversity in student viewpoints and life experiences. Increasingly, these efforts have involved promoting recognition and inclusion of indigenous knowledges in the university setting. If adopted in the classroom, the promotion of indigenous perspectives suggests exciting possibilities for teaching qualitative research critically. Existing educational resources, however, offer little guidance on achieving this through undergraduate qualitative methods teaching. Using examples of Canadian undergraduate teaching initiatives, I suggest that by integrating indigenous methods, perspectives, and epistemology, particularly through student opportunities for community-engaged learning and exposure to participatory action research, teaching qualitative research can promote critical recognition of multiple ways of knowing. URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs150347
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 | 0.482 | 0.308 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.059 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".