MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282923872

Towards Indigenizing University Policy

2015· article· en· W2282923872 on OpenAlexaffabout
JoLee Sasakamoose, Shauneen Pete

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Teaching and Learning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIgnoranceIndigenizationIndigenousPolitical scienceSociologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores some of the challenges associated with Indigenizing Canadian universities.  Like Indigenous scholars elsewhere, we seek guidance on how to undertake university Indigenization, and failing to find other examples we have decided to share our experiences here.  This case study describes one event (hosting a feast and round dance) which provoked institutional policy reforms.  We identify the ways in which our struggle to reform policy was often hampered by epistemic ignorance (Kuokkanen, 2007).  We also explan how we are coming to understand our responsiblities for also addressing epistemic ignorance at the same time as we are changing the organizations in which we work. oma masinahikanis kitâpahtamok ohi kâ-moniskâkocik kakwe-iyiniwastacik kihci-kiskinwahamâtowikamikohkwa. peyakwan oki iyiniwak kâ-atoskecik ekotowihk, kiskiyihtamok e-nohtepayihk awiyahk ta-nikânistahk. mistahi nanitonamohk tânisi ka-isi-nâkwaniyek mâka wiyawâw soskwâc âcimosowak oma e-isi-wâpahtâkik. Tâpiskoc oma peyak (e-kistipohk ekwa e-picicinihke) ekwa ki-tâwakiskamok ohi wiyasiwâcikanisa kakwe-miskotastâcik. ekota wâpahtamok poko kwayas kakwe takwastâcik wiyasiwâcikanisa ekosi nawâc ta-miyo-mâmawi-atoskewak.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0210.068
Scholarly communication0.0260.013
Open science0.0040.014
Research integrity0.0130.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Teaching and LearningSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207