The Role of Indigenous Knowledge Practices Within Transformative Reconciliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This métissage explores scholarly relations among local Indigenous communities, school districts, teacher-learners and Simon Fraser University’s graduate diploma program titled Indigenous Education: Education for Reconciliation. Through our collective attending to the role of Indigenous knowledge practices and making within transformative reconciliation, a powerful resurgence of Indigenous ways of knowing and being emerged. This resurgence came about through participatory pedagogies of making and through the sharing of Indigenous knowledges, cultural practices, ceremony and language revitalization. The focus on Indigenous knowledge practices, circle processes and artmaking, as well as Indigenous worldviews, knowledges and perspectives, provided an enactment of rigorous resurgence and transformative reconciliation (Ash et al., 2018). Opportunities to be involved in Indigenous making and land practice with Indigenous Knowledge Holders provided occasions for teacher-learners to embody and embed Indigenous pedagogies and “two-eyed seeing” (Bartlett et al., 2012) within their educational practice. Throughout the program, teacher-learners were invited into Indigenous making, creative and critical conversations, exploring circle pedagogies, participatory processes, place-based explorations and intercultural dialogues with Indigenous Knowledge Holders and Elders. The teachers acknowledged and experienced Indigenous protocols and ceremonies, and they actively explored Indigenous teachings through Indigenous participatory pedagogies. An emphasis was placed on creating authentic Indigenous-learning pathways and to do so in relation to knowledge practices within a particular place, peoples and their unique cultural ecology. This Indigenous Métissage (Donald, 2012) weaves together narrative threads into a story of collaboration between teacher-learners and Knowledge Holders. They stand as a family stands, together to share and give witness to the profound learnings that have emerged from the journey.
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 | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".