MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384704058 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.75486

Creating and Implementing an Indigenous Evaluation Framework Process With Minnesota Tribes

2023· article· en· W4384704058 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mélanie Nadeau, Vanessa Tibbitts, Ryan Eagle, Gretchen Dobervich

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousProcess (computing)Resource (disambiguation)Traditional knowledgeWork (physics)SociologyBest practiceCulturally appropriatePublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringGerontologyLawMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is an exemplar of incorporating traditional Indigenous approaches into evaluation practice and addresses the Eastern Door—Be a Good Relative. Throughout the creation of a process for implementing an Indigenous evaluation framework, the American Indian Public Health Resource Center team came to the work rested and ready in ways that reflected traditional, cultural, and spiritual ways of knowing. Throughout the authors’ process, they respectfully listened and sought to understand first and foremost their Tribal partners and let them guide the authors’ decision-making process for taking the best pathway forward together. The authors are honoured to share their story.

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)0.013
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207