MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923369233

Professional Development, Culturally Responsive Practices (CRP) and Indigenous Student Success: A Comparative Case-Study of New Zealand and Saskatchewan, Canada

2019· article· en· W2923369233 on OpenAlexaffabout
Theresa A. Papp

Bibliographic record

Venue2019 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPedagogyGraduation (instrument)CurriculumSociologyProfessional developmentTransformational leadershipTraditional knowledgePolitical sciencePublic relations
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative instrumental multiple case-study explores teachers’ perspectives on the effects of professional development (PD) in culturally-responsive and relational pedagogy on the improved academic outcomes of Indigenous students in New Zealand and Saskatchewan, Canada. Through inquiry-based pedagogy, infused with Indigenous cultures, students experienced more meaningful learning, engagement, and as a result, both schools experienced notable improvements in graduation rates and enhanced credit completion within a few years. Findings highlight the transformational potential of intentional PD, especially its capacity to induce educators to confront deeply-held epistemic and ontological assumptions about curriculum and pedagogy and to contemplate fundamentally different relationships with students and their families.  Because of commonalities between Saskatchewan and New Zealand, and many other international contexts with similar educational inequities and post-colonial tensions, the implications of this research are potentially broad and significant.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2019 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of EducationSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207