Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two Canadian settler teachers explore the intention and iterative, enduring process of reconciliation in high school classrooms through storytelling of their own lived experiences. They respectfully ‘call-in' other settler teachers who may feel paralyzed for fear of appropriation and the heaviness of this reconciliatory work. Weaving in how the 5Rs have guided the two teachers' journeys toward incorporating Indigenous pedagogies into their praxis and suggesting how these principles could support other settler educators who are beginning their decolonization journey, an Interwoven Living Framework that illuminates their learning ‘from' is developed. The framework is grounded in actionizing the 5Rs through the critical work of listening to, learning from, working, and walking with First Peoples. Using narratives, the teachers story their “walk” inspired by the words of an Indigenous student from their class, Poppy. They share a place to begin towards truly understanding how to become an entrusted Indigenous ally-to-be and how to actionize this collective work in high school landscapes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".