MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762945084

We Cannot Call Back Colonial Stories: Storytelling and Critical Land Literacy

2017· article· en· W2762945084 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
rosalind hampton, Ashley DeMartini

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStorytellingIndigenousLiteracyNarrativeSociologyCitizen journalismColonialismRelation (database)Critical literacyDigital storytellingPedagogySocial scienceMedia studiesPolitical scienceGeographyEcologyArchaeologyLiteratureLawArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the role of stories and storytelling in both shaping and revealing pre-service teachers’ understandings of land. The authors conducted a study using digital storytelling as a participatory method of inquiry examining participants’ conceptions of land. Participants’ narratives reflect stories they have been told about their families, communities, and nations, revealing inextricable links between conceptions of land, nation, and self in relation to others. The authors propose the notion of critical land literacy as a pedagogical goal in Teacher Education. They define critical land literacy as an understanding of, and relation to, land informed by Indigenous knowledges and a critique of ongoing settler-colonialism in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.041
Scholarly communication0.0110.016
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducationSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207