MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287147797 · doi:10.47381/aijre.v32i2.318

Wāhkōhtowin Decolonising Teacher Preparation for Rural, Urban and First Nations Schools

2022· article· en· W4287147797 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dawn Wallin, Chris Scribe

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian and International Journal of Rural Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous and Place-Based Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIndigenousGeneral partnershipPedagogyIdentity (music)Indigenous languageCeremonyTeacher preparationProfessional developmentSociologyTeacher educationPolitical scienceMathematics educationPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper stories the creation of the Wāhkōhtowin teacher preparation model on Treaty 6 territory in Saskatchewan, Canada. The model was created out of an educational partnership that responded to the teachings of Nēhiyaw (Cree) Indigenous Elders. We describe the theoretical framework of this Professional Development School (PDS) teacher preparation model that is designed to decolonize teacher preparation in order to foster student learning and engagement; develop Nēhiyaw teacher identity and proficiency, and; support reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. The foundational constructs of the Wāhkōhtowin model of teacher preparation include relationality, ceremony, language, and child-centredness. The spirit of Wāhkōhtowin teacher preparation is premised on three intents. Firstly, teacher candidates are encouraged to be free to be themselves and share the gifts they bring to the school setting (tipéyimisowin). Secondly, they are encouraged to ‘come home’ to traditional teachings as they engage in cultural learning and identity formation (kīwēwin). Thirdly, their pedagogical growth and development as teachers is fostered with the focus on relational pedagogies, inclusiveness, and community (mamáwi kiskinomāsowin). We complete our paper by discussing the implementation of the Wāhkōhtowin model. We discuss the ways in which the model has had to shift to be responsive to the unique relationships and contexts of different school systems, provincial budget cuts, the opportunity to expand the program into secondary schools, working with/through teacher turnover, the provision of language and cultural activities, land-based programming, professional development sessions, differing comfort levels and knowledge regarding Indigenous history and traditions, and the impact of COVID-19.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian and International Journal of Rural EducationSame topicIndigenous and Place-Based EducationFrench-language works237,207