Understanding the development of Indigenous Perspectives of students within co-curricular engagement and learning in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In today's educational and professional landscapes, the cultivation of transferable skills and relevant attributes is acknowledged as a vital component for achieving student success and enhancing employability (Alarcón, 2021). This research investigates the integration of co-curricular learning and activities to advance graduate attributes such as Indigenous perspectives. This study took place within Vancouver Island University (VIU), aligning with VIU's commitment to Indigenous rights and reconciliation (VIU Academic Plan, 2017). This research study has taken a constructivist perspective that provided a philosophical framework which shaped the research questions and guided the methodological process of the study (Burrell & Morgan, 2016). Through employing qualitative methods in understanding surveys and interviews, the study explored the impact of the Moose Hide Campaign Workshop on the development of competencies, particularly Indigenous perspectives, highlighting the urgent need for Canadian Higher Education Institutions to embrace Indigenous viewpoints in co-curricular activities. While the study is predominantly qualitative, some quantitative data was collected to provide an impression of the strength of changes in perception before and after the learning experience, enriching the understanding of the thematic analysis. Thematic analysis of interview responses revealed core themes, including motivation, learning experience, graduate attributes, and self-reflection. This research demonstrated the importance of the student development theory as a framework for assessing co-curricular learning activities and advocates for the integration of co-curricular experiences into the university community (Meents-DeCaigny & Sanders, 2015). This study concludes by recommending a co-curricular engagement and learning assessment scorecard and the adoption of similar workshops by other institutions of higher education. The findings emphasize holistic student learning outcomes, and the transformative potential of co-curricular learning in fostering understanding, self- reflection, skill development and reconciliation in Canada. This study advocates for the importance of incorporating co-curricular learning and Indigenous knowledge in relevant Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) both within and beyond Canada.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".