Educators' Perspectives about a Public School District's Aboriginal Education Enhancement Agreement in British Columbia
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
Historically, the education of Aboriginal people in Canada has been a paternalistic andcolonial undertaking, causing great harm and loss to Aboriginal peoples and their traditional knowledge(s) and ways of knowing. In attempts to move forward from thelegacy of residential schools in British Columbia, school districts and Aboriginal groupshave begun to forge new partnerships to meet the educational needs of Aboriginal youthin the form of Aboriginal Education Enhancement Agreements (AEEAs). The purposeof this study was to investigate the experiences of educators as they implemented suchan agreement in the Burnaby school district. Our research intended to answer questions regarding the nature of the agreement's impact on the ways in which educatorsof Aboriginal youth worked. In terms of how the members of the Aboriginal EducationSupport Team (AEST) perceived the implementation of the AEEA, our research teamfound two significant and recurring themes. Firstly, notions of success for Aboriginalstudents still relied heavily on Eurocentric measures, such as graduation rates, undermining other more holistic notions of success. Secondly, the flow of informationand awareness within the district was perceived to flow well vertically up the districthierarchy, but did not diffuse as prevalently across the district between and withinschools. The study also includes several recommendations to help support the AESTas they continue their important work in continuing to implement the current agreement. Finally, potential areas for future research are also suggested.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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