Keeping First Nations in Their Place–The Myth of “First Nations Control of First Nations Education”: A Commentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The federal government of Canada has constitutional responsibility for First Nations education. There is no evidence that the federal government has attempted to develop a comprehensive First Nations education system. Most studies have found serious flaws in the current realities faced by First Nations children attending First Nations-controlled schools throughout Canada (e.g., low levels of academic achievement, lack of second-level specialist support, inadequate school facilities, and low teacher pay). These difficulties are not found in provincial schools in which the federal government supports First Nations students. Despite its poor track record in First Nations education, the federal government remains convinced that it knows what is best for First Nations children attending First Nations schools across Canada. First Nations educational involvement, knowledge and expertise are not really considered. The idea of "First Nations control of First Nations education" is really meaningless. This paper critiques the current education system and makes recommendations.
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 | 0.015 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.052 | 0.075 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".