Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book describes the evolution and practice of an innovative communitybased partnership approach to strengthening community capacity to design, deliver, and evaluate culturally appropriate programs to support young children's development.The approach, created through partnerships between First Nations in Canada and the authors at the University of Victoria, represents a significant departure from the established and familiar paths of training and education in North America, which typically promote knowledge transmission and prescribed best practices based on assumptions of their universal validity and desirability.The success of this partnership approach has meant stepping outside expected institutional relationships to identify a common ground of caring, respect, and flexibility, and an orientation toward action from which collaboration in program delivery and co-construction of curriculum can flow.The pilot partnership that led to the First Nations Partnership Programs was initiated in 1989 by Meadow Lake Tribal Council, representing nine Cree and Dene First Nations in the province of Saskatchewan in northcentral Canada.The Tribal Council had determined that the future wellbeing of these communities rested on the current health and wellness of their children.Since its formation in the early 1980s, Meadow Lake Tribal Council had undertaken several training and economic development ventures.Without reliable child care services, however, participants in the training programs were often forced to drop out.Small business developments, many of which depended on single parents as entrepreneurs and employees, were struggling (Pence and McCallum 1994).The Tribal Council's constituent communities recognized an urgent need for child care services
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.406 | 0.252 |
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".