A Digital Snapshot – A Media Arts Justice Toolkit Approach to Support Indigenous Self-Determining Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this piece, Lindquist provides a toolkit for working with Indigenous youth through media arts. In doing so, she braids the three themes of the Symposium together: Indigenous, digital, and youth issues. Here, she presents her work as part academic article, part toolkit. The toolkit includes four examples of media arts justice activities that can be used to engage and support youth as they make connections between local and global issues. These activities were used by nehiyaw youth from Frog Lake First Nation who were attending Heinsburg Community School with support from Native Youth Sexual Health Network. Each activity includes a step-by-step guide, as well as background information on the relevance for young people as well as the scholarly community. They are grounded in both project- and place-based pedagogical approaches, and have benefits for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. Lindquist theorizes around these examples throughout using Indigenous feminisms, reproductive justice, and education-based frameworks and thus bridges the gap between scholar and practitioner. This toolkit is emerging as a bridge between where we are at now and what we can imagine.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.002 |
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".