MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411209687 · doi:10.1080/26379112.2025.2501950

Choosing to Be Kin: The Emerging Indigenous Scholars Circle

2025· article· en· W4411209687 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tasha Brooks, Erynne M. Gilpin, Christine Webster, Shauneen Pete

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Women and Gender in Higher Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousNext of kinGenealogySociologyEnvironmental ethicsHistoryBiologyPhilosophyEcologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous faculty are underrepresented in Canadian higher education. Because of this invisibility there is a paucity of research exploring our experiences. The focus of this special edition is on visibilizing Indigenous women faculty. This article describes our experiences with a one-of-a-kind initiative: The Emerging Indigenous Scholars Circle. As Indigenous scholars, we aim to not only make visible our experiences as faculty, but to ensure what is seen reflects our ways of being and doing. In this article we engage with three decolonizing research projects : story (sharing our self-location and context), recalling (briefly presenting our applied research and how the findings informed the faculty development plan) and sharing to make visible our experiences in the Circle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience 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 score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Women and Gender in Higher EducationSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207