Indigenous Knowledge, Perspectives, and Design Principles in the Engineering Curriculum
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadians live with a legacy of troubled relationships between Indigenous Canadians and non-Indigenous Canadians, rooted in a history of colonialism and racism. Aligned with the Truth & Reconciliation Commission's Calls to Action and the University of Manitoba's Strategic Priorities 2015-2020, The Faculty of Engineering is planning curriculum initiatives to incorporate Indigenous Knowledge, perspectives and design principles.The paper reviews the conceptual approach which encompasses both the culture of the institution as well as specific curriculum initiatives. These curriculum initiatives include redeveloping three core courses, first-year Design in Engineering, third year Engineering Economics, and third year Technology & Society for explicit inclusion of Indigenous knowledge, perspectives, and design principles; integrating Indigenous design emphases in capstone design courses, including Indigenous design principles and design application of importance to Indigenous communities, such as infrastructure development, energy independence, and food security; increasing the participation of Indigenous students in the Coop/Industrial Internship Program (IIP), and using the Coop/IIP to build authentic linkages to Manitoba Indigenous communities and environments; and, fostering linkages between teaching and existing faculty research programs
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it