MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223502949 · doi:10.1080/14606925.2022.2058680

Indigenising design: The Seven Grandfathers’ Teachings as a design methodology

2022· article· en· W4223502949 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Design Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineeringEngineering ethicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents ‘The Seven Grandfathers’ Teachings as a Design Methodology’ which includes an Indigenous value system as a foresight method to identify future responsible design opportunities that integrate Indigenous knowledge and new possible role of designers towards a more sustainable and biocultural diverse world. The Seven Grandfathers’ Teachings have been an Indigenous way of knowing in North America for generations. The Indigenous authors explore how Indigenous knowledge systems, when applied to design, can produce an approach that promotes ethical designs and processes. This design methodology allows a respectful and conscious practice while integrating Indigenous knowledge, thus, Indigenising design practices. The role of designers changes according to time and place; Indigenous knowledges have the potential to give a different approach to enact environmental and culturally relevant design practices.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0130.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.085 · 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