MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083601465 · doi:10.1080/14623940500300707

Cultural loyalty: Aboriginal students take an ethical stance

2005· article· en· W2083601465 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueReflective Practice · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltySociologyConfidentialityContext (archaeology)Ethical issuesPsychologySocial psychologyAestheticsPolitical scienceLawEngineering ethicsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores ways in which Aboriginal students from an Aboriginal school in western Canada take an ethical stance whereby they apply concepts of privacy and confidentiality when dealing with or storying cultural experiences in the school context. The question that guides this paper is the extent to which Aboriginal students choose to protect their cultural experiences from the formal school setting by taking an ethical stance through which they express their Aboriginality relationally and informally rather than explicitly. I suggest that this ethical stance is related to cultural loyalty as a way of living authentically and relationally in the world, which means living with, rather than enduring or living against, the complexities of today’s world. I argue that cultural loyalty has three voices: an ancestral voice, a relational voice and an ethical voice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.466 · 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