Holistic Education and Pedagogy from the Inuit Worldview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article delves into the intricate fabric of Inuit holistic pedagogical practice, balancing the narrative and the historical dominance of Western colonial education frameworks within Inuit Nunangat. For decades, Inuit knowledge and learning methodologies have been marginalized, leading to a disconnect between education and the cultural fabric of the Inuit community. Recognizing the urgent need for revitalization and elevation of Inuit pedagogical models, this paper draws upon the invaluable insights of Elders, existing research, and narratives from two Inuit learners actively engaged in the Nunavut Network Environment for Indigenous Health Research. The study intertwines the wisdom of Elders, scholarly literature, and the lived experiences of Inuit learners to articulate learning models and specific components that are key in practice, such as experiential learning and relationship-building. By synthesizing diverse perspectives, the article offers an emerging multi-faceted understanding of Inuit pedagogical practice, highlighting its intrinsic connection to cultural identity, community well-being, and lifelong learning. Through the narratives of Inuit learners, the paper provides tangible examples of the transformative power of Inuit pedagogy in action, emphasizing the positive impact on individual empowerment and community resilience. By amplifying the voices of Elders and learners, this article contributes to the ongoing discourse on culturally responsive education and underscores the significance of reclaiming and reinstating Inuit holistic pedagogy as a cornerstone for education in the region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".