Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to share a student’s critical reflexivity process in an effort to overcome the insecurity confronted by the expectations of Indigenous-Settler reconciliation. The critical self-reflexivity we present is an essential practice to unlearn colonialism with the aim to foster critical thinking as a move towards a reconciliatory approach to education. Paulette Regan’s (2014) provoking research speaks to insecurity as a barrier to moving forward. Inspired by teachings of relational accountability and an Indigenous education course taught by an Indigenous female scholar, critical self-reflexivity is one of the pedagogical approaches to surpass insecurity and engage in reconciliation in more meaningful ways. Based on this experience, critical social justice pedagogies inspire Settlers to begin the process of acknowledging their privilege, power, perspective and the ways in which dominant knowledge production perpetuates inequities, injustice and marginalization. This article contributes to critical pedagogy in practice as demonstrated by a student’s critical reflection.
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 | 0.065 | 0.091 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.097 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".