MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925918668 · doi:10.26522/brocked.v28i1.783

Cree Elders’ Perspectives on Land-Based Education: A Case Study

2018· article· en· W2925918668 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
John Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock Education Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous and Place-Based Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousIndigenous educationTraditional knowledgeSociologyIdentity (music)Qualitative researchGeographyEnvironmental ethicsGender studiesSocial scienceEcologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study deals with the notion that Indigenous peoples are concerned with preserving their communities, nations, cultural values, and educational traditions. Indigenous peoples have a land-based education system that emerges out of their own worldviews and perspectives, which need to be applied to research concerning Indigenous cultures. This work explores Indigenous land-based education through the perspectives of Cree Elders of Northern, Manitoba. Six Cree Elders were interviewed to explore the ideas and practices of land-based education. The article engages discussion of Indigenous land-based education stemming from Elders’ teachings of Indigenous knowledge, cultural values, identity, and vision. Informed by Cree Elders, this qualitative study articulates an Indigenous interpretation of land-based education. Research findings demonstrate that Indigenous land-based education can be used to promote well-being among Indigenous peoples in Canada. While the study is based on the Cree experience in Northern Manitoba, its message is significant to many other Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. Drawing on the Elders’ teachings, policy recommendations are generated for advancing Indigenous land-based education

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock Education JournalSame topicIndigenous and Place-Based EducationFrench-language works237,207