Algonquin Ekwânamo matrix project : "a place to interface", for elders, indigenous scientists/non-indigenous scientists, indigenous knowledge systems and western science systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research is consistent with literature that states there are inequities relating to the under-representation of Indigenous students in the subjects of math, science and technology in education as compared to Non-Indigenous people in Canada. The analysis of nine in-depth interviews and the process of documentary explores two questions that this thesis aims to address: From the perspectives and dialogues of three Elders, three Indigenous scientists, and three Non-Indigenous scientists who have contemplated the ways to address the tensions between Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Western Science Systems: What are the educational possibilities, challenges, and benefits of having these systems interface? How can art, technology and dialogue be mediums for exploring the interface between these systems so that Indigenous learners may be motivated to participate in both knowledge systems? An interplay between three theoretical, methodological frameworks of Indigenous Storywork (Archibald, 2008a, 2008b), Irwin in A/r/tography (Irwin & Springgay, 2008), Implicate Order (Bohm, 2007) and through the development of a fourth theoretical, methodological framework the Algonquin Ekwânamo Matrix Project shape this research. Four themes emerged from this analysis: [1] Language and Story as Tools for Critical Thinking [2] Culture and Ecological Mindfulness in Kinships with Nature and All Living Entities [3] Identity and Relevance in Education as Seeing Ourselves in Academia [4] Presence and Wholistic Learning From the Heart. Four A’s Strategies emerged from the in-depth interviews in relation to the four themes that may incite new ways for building complementary relationships in science education: The first is Activating Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Knowledge Encounters Through Dialogue; second is Aligning Indigenous Knowledge Interfaces Through Dialogical Strategies; third is Applying Indigenous Knowledge and Western Science Interfacing Through Co-created Strategies in Bohmian Dialogue and First Nations Circles; and fourth is Anticipating Innovative Knowledge Enhancements through decentralized think tank groups that align with Indigenous culturally competent ways for accessing well being. This research study helped develop the Algonquin Ekwânamo Matrix Project’s theoretical and methodological framework that foreground the need to address the global ecological crisis through meaningful dialogue, respectful relationships and a new science paradigm that reflects wholistically art, science, diverse philosophies and perspectives.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".