MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414790034 · doi:10.21900/j.alise.2025.2094

Barriers and Collaborations in Decolonization and Indigenization of Library and Information Studies (LIS) Programs in Canada

2025· article· en· W4414790034 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ALISE Annual Conference · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenizationIndigenousCurriculumAllianceDecolonizationContext (archaeology)AccreditationWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decolonization and Indigenization of Library and Information Studies (LIS) curriculum is a crucial undertaking in the Canadian context, especially in light of the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), the adoption of UNDRIP, and national discussions around reconciliation. While there have been varied initiatives at Canadian LIS schools, structural barriers including accreditation requirements and institutional siloing among others inhibit the development of pan-Canadian collaborations. After a review of the literature, this paper explores the multiple barriers to decolonization and Indigenization of LIS curriculum in a Canadian context and then examines the work National Indigenous Knowledge and Language Alliance (NIKLA), and Indigenous led partnerships, in advancing work in this area. The paper concludes by discussing future work planned by NIKLA and its Indigenous Curriculum working group, while also noting future challenges.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · 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