MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096442688 · doi:10.1017/jie.2013.10

Examining the Potential Use of the Collaborative-Geomatics Informatics Tool to Foster Intergenerational Transfer of Knowledge in a Remote First Nation Community

2013· article· en· W2096442688 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrea D. Isogai, Daniel D. McCarthy, Holly Gardner, Jim D. Karagatzides, Skye Vandenberg, Christine D. Barbeau, Nadia A. Charania, Vicky Edwards, Donald Cowan, Leonard J. S. Tsuji

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Australian Journal of Indigenous Education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeography Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsGeorgian CollegeUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaBiodesign Institute, Arizona State University
KeywordsGeomaticsOutreachKnowledge transferInformaticsTraditional knowledgeSociologyIndigenousPublic relationsKnowledge managementGeographyEngineeringPolitical scienceRemote sensingEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Northern First Nations in Canada have experienced environmental change throughout history, adapting to these changes based on personal experience interacting with their environment. Community members of Fort Albany First Nation of northern Ontario, Canada, have voiced their concern that their youths’ connection to the land is diminishing, making this generation more vulnerable to environmental change. Community members previously identified the collaborative-geomatics informatics tool as potentially useful for fostering intergenerational knowledge transfer. In this article, we assess the potential of the informatics tool to reconnect youth with the surrounding land in order to strengthen the adaptive capacity of Fort Albany First Nation. The tool was introduced to students in an environmental-outreach camp that included traditional activities. Students used global positioning systems and geo-tagged photographs that were loaded onto the informatics tool. Semi-directed interviews revealed that the students enjoyed the visual and spatial capabilities of the system, and recognised its potential to be used in conjunction with traditional activities. This pilot study suggests that the tool has the potential to be used by youth to provide an opportunity for the intergenerational transfer of Indigenous knowledge, but further evaluation is required.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Australian Journal of Indigenous EducationSame topicGeography Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207