Unsettling the Settlers: Principles of a Decolonial Approach to Creating Safe(r) Spaces in Post‐secondary Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we discuss the ongoing colonial relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada with a consideration of how to align the principles and core values of community psychology in relation to Indigenous rights, decolonization, and social justice. In working with Community Psychology values to address issues of social justice it is necessary to recognize that empowerment alone is only one half of the solution. While our discipline focuses on oppression and the empowerment of vulnerable and disenfranchised populations we generally fail to consider the relational aspects of power and justice. Specifically, in recognizing power inequities the focus is often placed on empowerment among vulnerable or subjugated communities while neglecting the requisite counterbalance of consciousness-raising and de-powerment of dominant populations. The authors provide three personal accounts from a non-Indigenous faculty member, an Indigenous doctoral student, and a recently graduated non-Indigenous Masters student. We share our experiences of conscientization and decolonization within the post-secondary and graduate education systems. We describe an educational context, a pedagogical praxis, and our efforts to bridge the theories of Settler colonialism and community psychology. From our individual and collective reflections of engagement with decolonization in the education system we present an emergent framework that highlights four principles for decolonization. In implementing these principles we discuss the co-creation of safe(r), decolonized spaces within post-secondary institutions through deconstructing dominant narratives and illuminating Indigenous narratives of self-determination with attention to the de-powerment of non-Indigenous faculty and students.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.126 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".