Expanding Cybersecurity Knowledge Through an Indigenous Lens: A First Look
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decolonization and Indigenous education are at the forefront of Canadian content currently in Academia. Over the last few decades, we have seen some major changes in the way in which we share information. In particular, we have moved into an age of electronically-shared content, and there is an increasing expectation in Canada that this content is both culturally significant and relevant. In this paper, we discuss an ongoing community engagement initiative with First Nations communities in the Western Manitoba region. The initiative involves knowledge-sharing activities that focus on the topic of cybersecurity, and are aimed at a public audience. This initial look into our educational project focuses on the conceptual analysis and planning stage. We are developing a “Cybersecurity 101” mini-curriculum, to be implemented over several one-hour long workshops aimed at diverse groups (these public workshops may include a wide range of participants, from tech-adverse to tech-savvy). Learning assessment tools have been built in to the workshop program. We have created informational and promotional pamphlets, posters, lesson plans, and feedback questionnaires which we believe instill relevance and personal connection to this topic, helping to bridge gaps in accessibility for Indigenous communities while striving to build positive, reciprocal relationships. Our methodology is to approach the subject from a community needs and priorities perspective. Activities are therefore being tailored to fit each community. We hope this will lead to increased awareness and engagement by community members. Two Indigenous student research assistants were hired to assist in this project, which has developed into a blend of community outreach on the topic of security and data protection (most notably with respect to social media and online banking) and a computing education student-led educational research project.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".