Whose Land Are You On? Accounting for Land Acknowledgments in NAAB Accredited Schools of Architecture in the United States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the concept of land acknowledgment, explaining its essence, values, and limitations. Moreover, it sheds light on a notable gap: the lack of land acknowledgments within the higher education institutions in the United States, with a particular emphasis on those that have National Architectural AccreditingBoard (NAAB) accredited professional Schools of Architecture. It explores Land Acknowledgment, a term typically referring to a formal statement or recognition made at the beginning of an event, gathering, or document. It acknowledges the Indigenous peoples and their historical connection to the land on which the event, institution, or project takes place. Land acknowledgments are often used to show respect for the Indigenous communities whose land was colonized. The paper analyzes the cultural and pedagogical merits of land acknowledgments within this context. It also endeavors to unpack their limitations, acknowledging that they can be construedas symbolic gestures devoid of substantive action. Furthermore, the paper surveys the inadequate implementation of land acknowledgments within schools of architecture in the United States, especially compared to the schools’ hosting institutions. This lack of land acknowledgments is more noticeable when compared to other countries with similar histories of colonization, such as Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. In conclusion, the paper is a brief study of land acknowledgment that offers insights into the value and the lack of land acknowledgments in the NAAB-Accredited Schools of Architecture within the higher education institutions in the US, calling for actions, and pointing to the next steps that would help to build a better inclusive learning environment for architecture students and future architects.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it