MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211056614 · doi:10.7451/cbe.2021.63.9.1

Ten calls to action to integrate Indigenous Knowledges and perspectives into the Biosystems Engineering Program at the University of Manitoba

2022· article· en· W4211056614 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Biosystems Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsIndigenousCurriculumGeneral partnershipTraditional knowledgeEngineering ethicsSociologyEngineering educationAction researchPolitical sciencePedagogyEngineeringEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a rapid grey and academic literature scoping review was conducted to investigate how Indigenous Knowledges, perspectives, values and cultures are being incorporated into engineering education in several colonialized countries. The findings were used to make recommendations on advancing the Biosystems Engineering curriculum at the University of Manitoba to educate future engineers who have the cultural capacity to work ethically, respectfully, and reciprocally in engineering practice and partnership with Indigenous Peoples and communities. The study was spurred in part by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s 94 Calls to Action. In collaboration with Indigenous Peoples, calls for integrating Indigenous knowledge and teaching methods into classrooms and building student capacity for intercultural understanding, empathy, and mutual respect. Sources for this review were gathered from Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, countries that share a similar history of European colonization and are developing methods for curricular change. The findings demonstrated that incorporation of Indigenous Knowledges perspectives in engineering education can be organized into five main themes: 1. capacity building for engineering educators, 2. consultation and collaboration with Indigenous Peoples and communities, 3. coalescing dominant, Indigenous and engineering perspectives, 4. preparing students for professional practice with Indigenous Peoples, and 5. developing a new curriculum. By incorporating these recommendations, engineering educators will help create an educational environment where Indigenous Peoples and their ways of knowing, being and doing have space alongside Western and engineering worldviews. This will prepare engineering students for culturally sensitive and ethically sound professional practice and support the students who will see themselves reflected in Biosystems Engineering.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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