Existing Always-Already: Settler Colonialism with/in Alberta Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following announcements to update teacher training, curriculum, and policies, Alberta Education declared their commitment to reconciliation by adopting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s Calls to Action. Yet, there are four reasons why teachers avoid teaching Indigenous content: a) lack of knowledge, b) lack of resources, c) little administrative support, and d) not believing Indigenous topics are important to teach. Considering these factors, will reconciliation happen? Since Canadian settler colonialism exists always-already, I contend reconciliation will not occur because of a) the fundamental nature of settler colonialism within Canadian institutions, and b) due to there being no greater movement to decolonize governmental institutions. As an ideological structure based on the premise of replacing Indigeneity and constructing an Indigenous/settler binary, settler colonialism theoretically frames this work. Utilizing a quanti-qualitative research design, data were collected from 168 responses to an anonymous, mixed-method, online survey that employed open- and closed-answer questions. Preliminary findings indicate that settler colonial ideologies predominantly remain unchallenged by teachers and that most require greater understanding of racism; however, many respondents acknowledged shortcomings in their knowledge and understanding of Indigenous histories, knowledges, and concerns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".