Supporting alberta indigenous youth activity-promoting programs: A gathering to facilitate knowledge-to-action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the presentation is to share the process and outcomes of an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) project that emerged as a gathering of Indigenous youth activity-promoting (IYAP) programmers in Alberta, Canada. This project is a part of a larger community-based participatory research (CBPR) project focused on exploring how to support IYAP programming in Alberta, Canada. In response to feedback and results from the second phase of this CBPR, a gathering was organized to provide support to IYAP programmers and to discuss how to further support IYAP programming. Approximately 35 people attended the gathering and participated in open space technology discussions and professional development speaker sessions addressing topics such as connecting with youth, promoting interagency support, and sustaining programs. Twelve participants shared their thoughts on what they found useful and beneficial about the gathering, their ability to network, their key take-away points, and their next steps in promoting and supporting IYAP programming. Upon reflection of the existing research literature, and in consideration of the participants' feedback, several factors have been identified as facilitating knowledge-to-action within the IYAP context: a) supporting participants' needs, b) facilitating a decolonizing space, c) creating opportunities for networking and engagement, and d) supporting on-going networking and knowledge-sharing opportunities. This project extends upon the knowledge translation and participatory research literature by highlighting considerations for developing an iKT project and, ultimately, quality community scholarship with Canadian Indigenous Peoples. Acknowledgments: Alberta Centre for Child, Family, and Community Research; International and Community Education, Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation, University of Alberta
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.004 |
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 teacher head, 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".