MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136900986 · doi:10.26522/brocked.v30i1.798

Teacher candidates’ and course instructors' perspectives of a mandatory Indigenous Education course in teacher education

2021· article· en· W3136900986 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Melissa Oskineegish, Paul D. Berger

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock Education Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousTeacher educationCourse (navigation)Likert scalePedagogyIndigenous educationPsychologyScale (ratio)Medical educationMathematics educationSociologyMedicineEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This mixed methods study examined non-Indigenous teacher candidates’ disposition towards a mandatory Aboriginal Education course in teacher education from teacher candidates’ and course instructors’ perspectives. Results from a pre- and post Likert Scale survey of two sections of an Aboriginal Education course at a small Canadian University indicated that teacher candidates felt more knowledgeable by the end of the course, and maintained a fairly strong interest in, and positive attitude towards, the course. Results from course instructors provided additional and, at times, contradictory information, describing the course as limited and, at best, an introduction to the issues and perspectives within Indigenous education. The results suggest the need for mandatory Indigenous Education courses and for faculties of education and school boards to provide further learning opportunities with Indigenous education content and resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock Education JournalSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207