MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400903231 · doi:10.4324/9781003471486-10

Taking Responsibility in Land-based Learning from a Racialized Woman's Perspective in Canada

2024· book-chapter· en· W4400903231 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Navi Toor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous and Place-Based Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)SociologyEnvironmental ethicsGender studiesPolitical scienceArtVisual artsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter highlights my responsibilities in land-based learning for establishing meaningful relationships with Indigenous communities in Canada. Understanding and taking responsibility for land-based learning as a process of decolonization is crucial to holding people accountable. Decolonization in land-based learning is a lifelong journey to have tough conversations and educate ourselves about raising our awareness of Indigenous people, successful stories, and land. In this chapter, I discuss why responsibilities in land-based learning will provide belongingness to me as a racialized woman in this Indigenous land. Mother Earth has been providing mankind with everything we need, however, as a community and society we have never given anything back in return. Land-based learning is something I continue to learn from, and it helps with self-reflection. Land-based learning supports reconciliation by bringing life into Indigenous culture. Being a racialized woman, it is my understanding that there is so much importance and value when it comes to land-based learning as it is able to revitalize traditional Indigenous practices such as language, community, and education. These are key concepts to push the understanding of Indigenous people and learning to take responsibility. For several decades, so many voices have been diminished by the overpowering voices of the colonizers. It is important to understand that the land-based learning goal is to extinguish the colonizer’s lens and incorrect ideology of Indigenous people being inferior to their white counterparts. The objective of this chapter is to recognize and acknowledge the immediate issues of Indigenous people while discussing the importance of reconciliation through land-based learning. Many may struggle to understand the idea of reconciliation as many may think a simple apology is the correct path for healing and reconciliation. Although, it is a start, a simple apology does not suffice in the massive picture of Truth and Reconciliation. “To the Commission, ‘reconciliation’ is about establishing and maintaining a mutually respectful relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples in this country” ( Fontaine, 2015 ). Reconciliation is much more than apologizing for the past, it is meant to highlight the dark past of Canada while creating a mutual acceptance of the inequality many Indigenous people had to face. That is why land-based learning is influential in presenting reconciliation as more than an apology. Reconciliation through land-based learning is multifaceted and requires time and dedication.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.1010.025
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndigenous and Place-Based EducationFrench-language works237,207