Examining differing notions of a ‘real’ education within Aboriginal communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On a recent visit to an on-reserve school in western Canada several students and teachers told the lead author of this paper, who is Aboriginal, that it was ‘not a real school’. Noting that this is not the first time both authors have heard this sentiment expressed by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginals alike, they unpack this conversational fragment to show how it is implicated in some of the most difficult challenges educators and policy makers face in enhancing the lives of Aboriginal peoples and communities in contemporary times. Guided by a hermeneutic sensibility and Indigenous conceptions of time, the authors present three interpretive possibilities of what it might mean for an on-reserve school to be deemed less than real. As part of this process they trace the historically rooted assumptions and conditions that inform these differing perspectives. The authors then draw on the insights of several indigenous scholars to ‘reread’ key themes that emerged from this analysis with the hope that it might offer more productive and relational possibilities for thinking about and discussing educational futures for Aboriginal communities and peoples.
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 | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.101 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| 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".