Leadership in a First Nations Community: Learning from Leaders’ Stories and Building Capacity in Support of First Nations Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of Canada, much like that of the United States, is mired in colonialism. One outcome of colonialism was the cultural genocide of the First Nations persons who lived on Turtle Island Millennia before the arrival of primarily European settlers (Battiste, 2010). Through policy decisions and actions, First Nations persons experienced—and continue to experience—discrimination, racism, harassment, violence, trauma, and death at the hands of white settlers (Duthie et al., 2019). The educational realm, including leadership, has been Eurocentric, centering European thinking, lifestyles, contributions, representation, and more (Khalifa et al., 2019). A scan of the literature in the area of community leadership is sparse in Indigenous representation. This paper endeavours to work with one indigenous community to explore and highlight First Nation leadership. Specifically, how educational and community leadership occurs among one First Nations community in Ontario, Canada. This single-case study comprising eleven qualitative interviews seeks to understand, through the eyes of First Nations leaders, how adult First Nations leaders engage in and foster leadership with children and youth in the Chippewas of the Thames First Nation community, and how the children and youth in turn provide shared leadership in their community. This study is of significance in that it aims to add to the discourse of decolonization (Diversi & Moreira, 2016), specifically the decolonization of First Nations leadership, which is not widely studied in the literature. The implications of this small case study are of particular significance in the Ontario educational realm, where the work continues to for First Nation leaders and could perhaps be expanded to include other First Nations communities with a view to informing policy that would decenter white worldviews and make space for centering and including conceptions of leadership from First Nations people.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".