(Re)making Assessment in the Trans-Systemic Space Shaped in the Meeting of Personal, Indigenous, and Relational Ways of Knowing and Being
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inquiring into Trudy, Shaun, and Janice’s experiences alongside Anishinabe Elder Dr. Mary Isabelle Young’s living pimatisiwin (walking in a good way) and pimosayta (learning to walk together) with us, we show how her living in these relationally ethical ways grounded our creating and offering an Assessment as Pimosayta course in two Canadian teacher education programs. The authors built from Mary’s teaching to include the experiences, knowledge, perspectives, and worldviews of Indigenous community members and scholars. These beginnings shaped openings for attentiveness to relationally ethical assessment through Indigenous, holistic, narrative, and relational ways of knowing, being, doing, and relating. Learning to dwell in enduring tensionality has been central, as this tensionality has emerged in Trudy, Shaun, and Janice’s attempts to create with the teachers the trans-systemic process and spaces imagined by Battiste. Trudy, Shaun, and Janice see that the enduring tensionality experienced in this middle space opens potential to begin to live the respectful, ethical, relational, and … ecological relationships described by Donald and the resultant ethical relationality that needs to ground these relationships.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it