Epistemic Ignorance as a Barrier to Indigenization: A Collaborative Self-Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this collaborative Self-Study of Teacher Education Practice (S-STEP), two researchers and critical friends addressed epistemic ignorance as a significant barrier to Indigenizing teacher education curricula in one Canadian university. The call to Indigenize curricula in Canada extends through all levels of education, making this study particularly important within teacher education. Specifically, this study asked: What can Indigenous and non-Indigenous teacher educators learn from each other about epistemic ignorance through collaborative S-STEP as they work towards Indigenization? This study follows the methodological tenets of S-STEP research and the 5Rs of Indigenous Research Methodology. Triangulated data was collected over six months through online informal meetings, reflective journal keeping, and note-taking. The data was thematically analyzed, and three themes emerged: settler colonial ignorance, white fragility, and critical consciousness. These themes were juxtaposed with three themes found in the literature: epistemic ignorance and white fragility, critical humility, and relational pedagogy. Findings highlighted the transformative potential of collaborative self-study between Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers to uncover moments of epistemic ignorance as a barrier to Indigenizing curricula. Implications for teacher education include the need to address discomfort associated with epistemic ignorance to facilitate authentic efforts when Indigenizing curricula.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it