“There Is a Difference”: Mi'kmaw Students' Perceptions and Experiences in a Public School and in a Band-Operated School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The establishment of First Nations-controlled schooling has become increasingly popular as a proposed solution to the high levels of underachievement experienced by Canada's First Nations students. Despite the fact that Canada's First Nations-controlled schools have been around for more than 40 years, there has been little research that considers the differences that exist between these schools and the provincially funded public schools that many First Nations students attend. Moreover, it is uncommon to hear the perspectives of students on these different school options. This article shares preliminary evidence comparing the experiences and perceptions of First Nations students in a public secondary school with those of students in a band-operated secondary school. Students' perceptions of their teachers and their school environments, especially as they relate to cultural identity and cultural safety, as well as other in-school factors they attribute to their academic success, are noted. This study suggests that more attention should be placed on examining the intricacies and differences associated with cultivating a culturally responsive school climate in public schools and band-operated schools. Finally, implications for First Nations education policy are offered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".