Empowering Indigenous Youth: A Strengths-Based Approach to Positive Development, Relationship Safety, and Community Building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation presents three interconnected manuscripts on various aspects of Indigenous youth wellness and the researcher’s journey in community-based research. The first paper (Chapter Two) provides a review of wellness factors that help Indigenous youth thrive. These factors are explored through the lens of the First Nations Mental Wellness Continuum framework. When cultural, social, and historical factors are prioritized, Indigenous youth may find hope, belonging, purpose, and meaning. Further, this review emphasises that culturally rooted initiatives empower Indigenous youth to build on their strengths. In paper two (Chapter Three), I utilized data from the nationally representative General Social Survey: Canadian’s Safety to explore Indigenous youths’ experiences of dating violence. Dating violence represents a manifestation of unhealthy relationship patterns that have emerged from colonial violence. Dating violence was significantly associated with age and gender, along with several social and psychological factors including religion, sense of belonging, and awareness of services. Findings illuminate the need for cultural and community supports as experiences of dating violence were significantly associated with poorer well-being among Indigenous youth. This secondary data analysis presents emerging insights into Indigenous youths’ experience of dating violence and offers some suggestions that can inform programming to support survivors. Finally, in paper three (Chapter Four), I share an autoethnography of my reflections observing Tsuut’ina Nation Police as they built a prevention and intervention program for youth who may be justice-system involved. This personal account sheds light on challenges and learning opportunities for Western researchers. I discuss the need to be flexible, respect local knowledge, and illustrate the practical application of principles discussed in previous chapters. This paper showcases the strengths of Tsuut’ina Nation, and the inherent capacity Indigenous communities have to develop community-driven, culturally-relevant programming that supports their youth. Together, these chapters present a deeper understanding of Indigenous youth wellness and the significance of culturally responsive, community-driven approaches. Indigenous knowledge must be integrated into practice and research to foster positive outcomes for Indigenous youth.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".