Redefining Learning and Assessment Practices Impacting Aboriginal Students: Considering Aboriginal Priorities Via Aboriginal and Western Worldviews
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
Although there is momentum among Canadian educators to incorporate Aboriginal content and epistemology into pre-kindergarten to postsecondary education, the learning and assessment of Aboriginal students remains subjugated by a Western perspective. The purpose of this article is to explore ideal learning contexts for Aboriginal students and juxtapose these ideas with the predominant learning and assessment tactics used in a school. Data for this qualitative study were collected via five focus groups involving grandparents/caregivers, representatives from Aboriginal organizations, and educators of one Saskatchewan school. Analyzed through Aboriginal and Western epistemologies, results indicated that, for Aboriginal students, learning and assessment are holistic experiences, and educators need to balance students’ academic assessment with other physical, emotional, and spiritual forms of assessment. These findings suggest that educators need to depart from the zone of cognitive competence and move toward promoting an educational zone of trustful intuition.Keywords: Aboriginal content and epistemology; holistic; learning and assessment
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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