MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3019135042 · doi:10.25959/100.00032757

Work-readiness discourse : indigenous perspectives on work, and the limitations of Australian indigenous employment policies

2019· dissertation· en· W3019135042 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUTAS Research Repository · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetisIndigenousCorporate governanceWorkforcePolitical sciencePopulationUnemploymentSociologyEconomic growthBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High rates of unemployment amongst Indigenous Australians in comparison to non-Indigenous Australians have been rendered a public policy problem by successive Australian Governments. The solutions are often coercive forms of neoliberal governance. Despite policy interventions targeting such populations in urban areas with an availability of jobs, unemployment rates remain higher than for the non-Indigenous population. This thesis introduces a new conceptualisation of policy and governance limitations and social action to contribute to understandings of unsuccessful Indigenous employment policy outcomes. I utilise the concept of metis knowledge – a form of know-how that originates from contextualised, practical experience – to critique policy and illustrate its role in limiting the aims of governance. Indigenous employment policy that governs through pedagogical technologies applied to the Indigenous workforce demonstrates this limitation through its assumptions that the metis knowledge required to become ‘work-ready’ can be transferred unproblematically. Where Indigenous people are driven by different motivations, ideas and aspirations in relation to work, Indigenous employment policies face the issue of epistemological dissonance. That is, the transferability of metis knowledge places a limit on the ability of Indigenous employment policy’s aim to create ‘work-ready’ subjects. I combine a critical and comparative methodological approach to analysing both Indigenous employment policy documents and interviews conducted with Indigenous respondents. I apply a critical discourse analysis to Indigenous employment policy documents to reveal an underlying work-readiness discourse and to highlight its effects and assumptions. I also thematically analyse interview material to uncover Indigenous respondents’ metis knowledge and their reactions to the imposition of ‘work-readiness metis knowledge’. A key finding arising from my comparison of these two datasets is that respondents experienced feelings of shame and ‘shamejob’ in relation to mainstream work and workplaces. That is, Indigenous employment policy creates ‘institutionally generated shamejob’. The clash between two sets of metis knowledges caused many to feel discouraged and demotivated in relation to participating in or finding work. I discuss these findings and their implications for policy and governance theory. In particular, there is a need for policy to recognise diverse orientations to work, and for a more epistemologically oriented view of how governance in plural liberal democratic societies functions or not.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.325 · 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