Decolonizing Community Psychology by Supporting Indigenous Knowledge, Projects, and Students: Lessons from Aotearoa New Zealand and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community psychology has long stood as a social justice agitator that encouraged reformation both within and outside of the academy, while keeping a firm goal of building greater well-being for people in communities. However, community psychology's historically Euro-centric orientation and applied, interventionist focus may inadvertently promote colonial agendas. In this paper, we focus on the example of Indigenous Pacific peoples, drawing upon experience working among Indigenous iTaukei Fijian communities and with Indigenous frameworks for promoting student success in Aotearoa New Zealand and Canada. We outline how community psychology curricula can strive toward decolonization by (a) teaching students to respectfully navigate complexities of Indigenous knowledge and traditions that contest colonial ways of being and doing, (b) act as facilitators who build toward collaborative community projects and model this research practice to students, and (c) boost Indigenous student success by fostering relationships with instructors and fellow students that are embedded within the relational model of self that is often absent in individualistic-oriented Western academic settings.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".