MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090496538 · doi:10.11575/prism/38307

Examining an Apparent Educating Gap Between Non-Indigenous and Indigenous Learners: A Hermeneutic Phenomenology Approach

2020· dissertation· en· W3090496538 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alfred Schaub

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous and Place-Based Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPhenomenology (philosophy)Hermeneutic phenomenologyPedagogyPsychologySociologyEpistemologyLived experiencePhilosophyPsychoanalysisBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This hermeneutic phenomenology study examined the apparent phenomenon of the educating gap – a persisting disparity between the educational experiences and results of Indigenous and non-Indigenous learners in a Kindergarten to grade 12 (K-12) public education system. I drew on the lived stories of non-Indigenous and Indigenous educational stakeholders as research participants to look for the presence or absence of deficit model language or for alternate explanations in their personal accounts of this disparity. The research setting was the North-Central, East Coast of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Under the umbrella of an indigenist perspective, while employing a method of narrative interviews and their analysis through a hermeneutic circle, this apparent educating gap was studied in terms beyond what can be learned through statistics and data, as a multi-dimensional phenomenon. Interviews and the ensuing analysis did not show any evidence of deficit model language used in participant narratives of this apparent educating gap. In place of such deficit explanations, the research revealed perceptions and perception patterns, pointing to hindrances or obstacles that disrupt equal learning opportunities for Indigenous students, families, and communities. These perceptions came to light in the participants’ life stories that outlined their experiences of the strengths and struggles in attempting to reach every learner equally. For the purpose of this research, the terms perception and perception patterns were used to point to participants’ experiences and insights related to the disparity of this apparent educating gap.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science 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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicIndigenous and Place-Based EducationFrench-language works237,207