MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379779877 · doi:10.1353/jaie.2017.a798926

“There Is a Difference”: Mi'kmaw Students' Perceptions and Experiences in a Public School and in a Band-Operated School

2017· article· en· W4379779877 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeff Orr, Daniel B. Robinson, Lisa Borden, Jennifer Tinkham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American Indian Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionSchool climatePolitical scienceSchool educationPedagogyIdentity (music)PsychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.337 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American Indian EducationSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207