Indonesian inquiry: A narrative of biocultural teaching on Sulawesi Utara
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Using phenomenology, narrative inquiry and autoethnographic approaches, this study analyses a program of faculty development conducted alongside the delivery of an international field school. Through this study, we explore the value and benefits of inter‐cultural field programming and how these might serve to complement or to redress prevailing university practices in Indonesia. As we describe in the included narratives, Indonesia provides ideal opportunities to explore intercultural and international approaches to education as part of a set of unique and immersive field experiences. Using the complementary theoretical lenses of biocultural diversity and sustainability, our coursework and faculty development opportunities are delivered together in cooperation with local partners and involve short or extended visits to local communities, national parks, cultural events and volunteer work with community organizations. These experiences are centred in Sulawesi Utara, within easy transportation from Manado and our academic home: a small Indonesian university that serves as lead for the program. Our experiences demonstrate that the inclusion of local and community‐based forms of knowledge can serve to broaden and enrich student learning while also increasing student engagement and cultural sensitivity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".