MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401363950 · doi:10.3138/cjpe-2024-0010

On the (In)Comparability of Indigenous Community-Based Research Within University Merit Systems

2024· article· en· W4401363950 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paulina Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComparabilityIndigenousSociologyGeographyPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through equity, diversity, inclusion, and decolonization, universities attempt to prioritize Indigenous scholars and knowledge systems. However, there are key problems with the structure of evaluation and performance that Indigenous scholars like myself are placed in. Bringing forward a Nêhiyawak, Four-Spirit, perspective, I challenge the university merit system and evaluation process by defining accountability, authenticity, intentionality, relationality, and reciprocity within a Nation-specific approach for cross-cultural knowledge sharing to the broader public. While there have been calls to support emerging Indigenous scholars, the systems we find ourselves in are still problematic and fail to address the key roots of White dominance and control that we face daily.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.322
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.133 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207