Relational Approach Towards Decolonizing Curriculum Development within the Colonial Postsecondary Institution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian academy is dominated by Western epistemologies that devalue Indigenous ways of knowing and marginalize Indigenous communities, cultures, and histories (Louie et al., 2017). This paper draws on a cross-disciplinary, interprofessional collaboration between a School of Public Health Sciences and School of Social Work to develop an online graduate course that sought to advance knowledge and practice in Indigenous wellbeing and health through a social justice lens. We explore key considerations, strategies, and challenges undertaken by an interdisciplinary group of non-Indigenous professors to create a learning experience for students that challenges colonial ways of seeing, being, knowing, and doing in the professional practice fields of public health and social work and that serves to elevate and sustain Indigenous voices, knowledges, sciences, and practices within the academy. In doing so, we centre the process of course development, including working with an Indigenous Advisory Circle and Indigenous contributors of content, guest lecture videos, and artwork. The paper describes the creation of a relational teaching and learning community, while raising concerns about the institutionalization of this approach to Indigenous-focused course development in the absence of the structural changes needed to enhance the presence of Indigenous faculty and Elders in academic institutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.739 | 0.355 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.573 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.510 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".