MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159910759 · doi:10.7202/1014860ar

Curriculum Change in Nunavut: Towards Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit

2013· article· en· W2159910759 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Heather E. McGregor

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaStrong
KeywordsCurriculumIndigenousCurriculum developmentPerspective (graphical)PedagogyCurriculum theoryIndigenous educationCurriculum frameworkCurriculum mappingEmergent curriculumSociologyWork (physics)EngineeringComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between 1985 and the present, curriculum developers, educators and Elders in Nunavut have been working towards reconceptualization of curriculum to better meet the strengths and needs of Inuit students and to reflect, preserve, and revitalize Inuit worldview, language, and culture. This article outlines the development of the 1989 curriculum framework Piniaqtavut, the 1996 framework Inuuqatigiit: The Curriculum from the Inuit Perspective, and the 2007 foundation document Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit: Education Framework for Nunavut Curriculum. It goes on to describe the cross-curricular principles and philosophies of education in Nunavut, and identify the most important contributing factors in this system-wide curriculum change process. The intent is both to describe the approach taken in Nunavut, as well as to inform comparable work in other Indigenous contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations38
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207