MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389001887 · doi:10.1177/11771801231197841

Why Inuit culture and language matter: decolonizing English second language learning

2023· article· en· W4389001887 on OpenAlexaffabout
N. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousDecolonizationColonialismIndigenous languageLingua francaLanguage revitalizationFirst languageContext (archaeology)NarrativeLanguage educationLinguisticsSociologyEthnologyHistoryPolitical sciencePedagogyArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While English as a second language is a component of the education programme in Nunavik, Canada, Inuit (Indigenous people of the Arctic) need to protect Inuktitut (Inuit language) as they navigate an online world where English is often the lingua franca on social media. Inuit qaujimajatuqangit (traditional knowledge) could provide the framework for decolonizing English as a second language education, as it has guided Inuit through centuries of change. This narrative literature review with commentary analysed 50 studies and related resources, summarizing Nunavik’s colonial history of linguistic imperialism and how some Indigenous communities resisted colonialism by decolonizing their education programmes. This analysis found a gap in studies specific to decolonizing English as a second language education in the Inuit context; therefore, the findings extrapolated that Inuit can decolonize by decentralizing colonial practices and centralizing Inuit qaujimajatuqangit and Inuktitut. The literature review offers pedagogical recommendations for decolonizing English as a second language education in Nunavik and other Indigenous communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous PeoplesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207