Keeoukaywin: The Visiting Way - Fostering an Indigenous Research Methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decolonizing research methodologies are increasingly becoming the forefront of research with, for and/or by Indigenous peoples. This paper aims to highlight an Indigenous research methodology that emerged from a Metis researcher’s relation with Omushkego people from Moose Cree First Nation (Moose Factory, Ontario, Canada) during my doctoral research from 2012 to 2016. The contents of the article represent a decolonizing process of doing research with a broader research aim to make links between land-based pedagogy and milo pimatisiwin (good life). It is with the Omushkego people of Moose Cree First Nation and how the community itself led me to remember, to reclaim and to regenerate what I came to identity as Keeoukaywin meaning the Visiting Way. With relationality at its core, the Visiting Way - Keeoukaywin - re-centers Metis and Cree ways of being as a practical and meaningful methodology to foster milo pimatisiwin, living and being well in relation. The study shows how an Indigenous research methodology promotes self-recognition in relation to the land, history, community and values and demystifies our own epistemic relation to historical truths.
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 | 0.057 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".