“It's Only Right That You Should Play The Way You Feel It”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This conceptual paper explores Indigenous conceptualizations of “creativity” through the creative production of practicing Indigenous creators. Too frequently, the creativity of Indigenous Peoples is misunderstood or pathologized by non-indigenous people as a function of a restricted vision of what constitutes creative production. The culturally embedded construction of creativity as a concept contributes to the misinterpretation of creativity and creative output. This paper begins with an examination of a single viral TikTok video which developed through conversations and reflections with colleagues and community. These conversations led to the initial exploration into Indigenous creatives’ conceptions of creativity. Using Indigenous creatives’ language as a site of analysis, this paper offers reflections on the creative process of Indigenous Peoples, centered in: identity, resisting invisibility and countering erasure, connecting creativity to activism, creativity as a site of joy and celebration and creativity as community building and connection. In exploring creativity, this paper hopes to support educators in their work with Indigenous students, as well as those working with Indigenous Peoples’ topics and content in developing culturally responsive conceptions of Indigenous creativity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".