MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242459855 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v47i3.187948

Applying Indigenizing Principles of Decolonizing Methodologies in University Classrooms

2017· article· en· W4242459855 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Dustin William Louie, Yvonne Poitras-Pratt, Aubrey Jean Hanson, Jacqueline Ottmann

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsIndigenousMonopolizationSociologyPedagogyTraditional knowledgeIndigenous educationHigher educationPolitical scienceLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study examines ongoing work to Indigenize education programs at one Canadian university. The history of the academy in Canada has been dominated by Western epistemologies, which have devalued Indigenous ways of knowing and set the grounds for continued marginalization of Indigenous students, communities, cultures, and histories. We argue that institutions of higher learning need to move away from the myopic lens used to view education and implement Indigenizing strategies in order to counteract the systemic monopolization of knowledge and communication. Faculties of education are taking a leading role in Canadian universities by hiring Indigenous scholars and incorporating Indigenous ways of knowing into teacher education courses. Inspired by the 25 Indigenous principles outlined by Maōri scholar Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2012), four Indigenous faculty members from Western Canada document effective decolonizing practices for classroom experience, interaction, and learning that reflect Indigenous values and orientations within their teaching 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.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.062
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0040.015
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations54
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207