The Gap between Indigenous Ways of Life and Formal Education among the Guji People in Southern Ethiopia: Challenges and Lessons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children among indigenous people are involved in two disconnected social environments: the indigenous home context and the “modern” school environment. This disconnection and the way it affects children’s everyday lives have received little research attention so far. Drawing on an ethnographic approach, this article examines children’s perspectives on this disconnection and its effects on their educational well-being among the Guji people in Ethiopia. Unstructured interviews, focus group discussions and participant observations were used to generate data. Data were collected from three villages in the western part of the Guji district in 2019. Twenty-five children (13 girls and 12 boys) in the age range of 6-13 and their parents participated as sources of data. The data wereanalyzed qualitatively and the result shows that the gap between the indigenous ways of life and formal education has exposed children to a sense of dis-entanglement and increasing challenges of learning. It discusses that the gap between the indigenous ways of life and formal education has weakened children’s learning efficacy; therefore, needs due attention from the government, policymakers, curriculum developers, teachers, and parents.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".