Kontihahanorónhstha’: The Maternal Essence of Indigenous Women’s Literatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article begins by offering a personal narrative to showcase the experiences of Indigenous women in higher education. My own narrative is grounded in my cultural identity as a Haudenosaunee scholar, and I open by sharing the contemporary lessons of the Haudenosaunee Creation Story. By sharing Indigenous maternal knowledge as gleaned from creation stories and connections to our grandmothers’ stories, I highlight the intergenerational support of Indigenous academic success. As an overarching framework, scholarship on Indigenous maternal praxis is interwoven throughout this article to showcase the need for culturally relevant curriculum for Indigenous women. By sharing narratives of Indigenous women who participated in my graduate research, I highlight the Maternal Essence of Indigenous women’s literatures as community narratives of strength. I write about Indigenous women’s journeys into higher education and present Indigenous women’s visions of academic success that are connected to family and community relations. Bringing the article full circle, I present Maternal Essence in Indigenous women’s literatures as a theoretical orientation and contextualize it within intergenerational visions of kinship that support Indigenous women’s success in higher education.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".