Community Capacity as an “Inside Job”: Evolution of Perceived Ownership within a University-Aboriginal Community Partnership
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE. To assess the evolution of perceived ownership of a university-Aboriginal community partnership across three project stages. DESIGN. Survey administration to project partners during project formalization (1996-T1), mobilization (1999-T2), and maintenance (2004-T3). SETTING. Aboriginal community of Kahnawake, outside Montreal, Quebec, Canada. PARTICIPANTS. Partners involved in influencing decision making in the Kahnawake Schools Diabetes Prevention Project (KSDPP). MEASURE AND ANALYSIS . A measure of perceived primary ownership subjected to linear trend analysis. RESULTS. KSDPP staff were perceived as primary owner at T1 and shared ownership with Community Advisory Board (CAB) members at T2 and T3. Trend tests indicated greater perceived ownership between T1 and T3 for CAB (χ(2)(1) = 12.3, p < .0001) and declining KSDPP staff (χ(2)(1) = 10.5, p < .001) ownership over time. Academic partners were never perceived as primary owners. CONCLUSION. This project was community driven from the beginning. It was not dependent on an external academic change agent to activate the community and develop the community's capacity to plan and implement a solution. It still took several years for the grassroots CAB to take responsibility from KSDPP staff, thus indicating the need for sustained funding to build grassroots community capacity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it