Changing the subject in teacher education: Centering Indigenous, diasporic, and settler colonial relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper suggests that, so long as we are focused on racism and colonialism as an exclusively Indigenous struggle, we fail to engage non-Indigenous peoples as “allies” of Indigenous education and sovereignty. My goal is to place a developing literature on settler-Indigenous alliances into a productive and more explicit dialogue with anti-oppressive educational theory and praxis. I address two critical questions: 1) How might we engage structurally privileged learners, some of whom are non-Indigenous peoples, to think about colonial dominance and racism in Canada? and 2) How might we work in coalition with privileged learners—and especially with new Canadians—to consider matters of land, citizenship, and colonization? I conclude by identifying a series of pedagogical practices aimed at the troubling of normalcy—an approach to teaching that disrupts the binary of self/Other. I consider briefly in turn the implications of this pedagogy for decolonization, the invigoration of teacher education programs in Canada, and the building and rejuvenation of relationships between Indigenous peoples and settler, diasporic, and migrant Indigenous populations.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.050 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".