MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296296821 · doi:10.7202/1036109ar

Neo-colonialism in Our Schools: Representations of Indigenous Perspectives in Ontario Science Curricula

2016· article· en· W2296296821 on OpenAlex
Eun-Ji Amy Kim

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous and Place-Based Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumIndigenousChristian ministryColonialismRepresentation (politics)PedagogyContent analysisSociologyIndigenous educationState (computer science)Political scienceSocial scienceLawPoliticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by the striking under-representation of Indigenous students in the field of science and technology, the Ontario Ministry of Education has attempted to integrate Aboriginal perspectives into their official curricula in hopes of making a more culturally relevant curriculum for Indigenous students. Using hermeneutic content analysis (HCA), a mixed-method framework for analyzing content, this study examined how and to what extent Aboriginal content is represented in Ontario’s official science curriculum documents. Given that very little has been published in this specific area, this research sheds light on the current state of the representation of Aboriginal cultures in contemporary Canadian science curriculum.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.220 · 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