The Role of Inuit Languages in Nunavut Schooling: Nunavut Teachers Talk about Bilingual Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a discourse analysis of interview transcripts generated from 10 experienced Nunavut teachers (five Inuit and five non ‐ Inuit) regarding the role of Inuit languages in Nunavut schooling. Discussion and analysis focus on the motif of bilingual education. Teachers’ talk identified discourse models of “academic truths” and “revitalization,”demonstrating how Nunavut teachers are making efforts to en ‐ gage with community to effect lasting educational change. Key words: Aboriginal languages; Nunavut education, language policy, discourse analysis, educational change Cet article presente une analyse de discours a partir de transcriptions d’entrevues aupres de dix enseignantes d’experience du Nunavut (cinq Inuits et cinq non ‐ Inuits) au sujet du role des langues inuites dans les ecoles du Nunavut. Les discussions et analyses portent sur la raison d’etre de l’enseignement bilingue. Dans leurs propos, les enseignantes ont identifie des modeles discursifs des « verites pedagogiques » et de la « revitalisation », demontrant par la comment le personnel enseignant au Nuna ‐ vut s’efforcent de travailler de concert avec la communaute pour favoriser des chan ‐ gements a long terme dans l’education. Mots cles : langues autochtones, education au Nunavut, politiques linguistiques, analyse de discours, changement en l’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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".