MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966800964 · doi:10.26203/zm8m-wa24

Reconciliation, resilience and resistance in Inuit teacher's professional development and practices

2019· article· en· W2966800964 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kathy Snow, Shelly Tulloch, Heather Ochalski, Melanie O’Gorman

Bibliographic record

VenueWinnSpace (University of Winnipeg) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsInuit Tapiriit KanatamiUniversity of WinnipegCape Breton University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaArcticNet
KeywordsChristian ministryResilience (materials science)Resistance (ecology)Professional developmentPsychological resilienceLibrary sciencePolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyPsychologyBiologyEcologyComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In February 2017, 26 Inuit educators gathered in Nain, Nunatsiavut for the Inuit Education Forum. Teachers from each of the four Inuit regions in Canada were invited to share their experiences on education in Inuit Nunangat with the goal of identifying barriers and promising practices occurring within their communities. One of the key themes arising from these conversations was the ongoing need for Inuit teacher support and development in schools. Training and retaining Inuit teachers is problematic in Canada, while research tells us that both of these factors are key to student success. Some key challenges impacting resilience for teachers identified by the Inuit Education Forum participants were: organization of learning and leadership, prioritization of Inuit language and culture in schools, and negotiations of teachers’ isolation and autonomy. These challenges and the solutions offered by participants are discussed in the Canadian historical context implications for teacher training and professional development in Inuit Nunangat are highlighted.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWinnSpace (University of Winnipeg)Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207