Pūpūkahi i Holomua: A Story of Hawaiian Education and a Theory of Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Hawaiian kingdom, prior to the illegal overthrow of its monarchy (1893) and the subsequent English-only Law (1896), had boasted a 91-95% literacy rate. Within that learning environment learners had a clear sense of purpose because Hawaiians had a firm grasp of who they were, where they were, and what they had to contribute. Since the English-only Law and US annexation of Hawai‘i (1898), however, the settler colonialschool system has maintained levels of cultural dissonance that have manifested as inequitable student outcomes for Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (NHPI) across multiple academic and disciplinary student indicators (i.e., proficiency, suspension rates, etc). While western law and US compulsory education severed traditional sources of knowledge production that had provided a sustainable model of a‘o (teaching and learning), the ancestors of the Native Hawaiian community were diligent about preserving the keys to their genealogical legacies within more than 120,000 pages of Hawaiian-language newspapers. This collective repository is a resource that helps the Office of Hawaian Education (OHE) rethread Hawaiian education into the tapestry of traditional sources of knowledge production to improve sustainability (cultural, intellectual, environmental, political, etc.) for all learners. OHE uses a theory of change that engages primary and secondary sources, quantitative and qualitative data, in action research that informs Why contemporary circumstances exist, What those contemporary circumstances are, Where we want Hawaiian education to go, and How we are going to get there.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".