Ts’iyenï kwin ghineendïl (everyone came back to the fire)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research renews and articulates distinctly Witsuwit’en approaches to caring for vulnerable children and families, helping facilitate Witsuwit’en jurisdiction over child welfare. In collaboration with the Office of the Wet’suwet’en, this project was carried out with a research circle of hereditary chiefs, frontline workers, and social services leaders from the Witsuwit’en Nation. We followed from Indigenous methodologies and Indigenous Storywork and held sharing circles for data collection. Interpretation was collaborative and the themes are represented in the voices of the participants themselves. This research found that caring for vulnerable children and families in a Witsuwit’en way relies on ts’iyenï kwin ghineendïl (everyone coming back to the fire). This is a homecoming to yintah (land), wiggüs (respect), hereditary system, niwhkinic (our language), and social responsibility. Coming back to the fire rests upon Witsuwit’en laws and the wisdom of the ancestors who have come before. The challenges confronting the Witsuwit’en Nation stem from the intergenerational impacts of colonization that resulted in a disconnect from Witsuwit’en lands and people. Consequently, repair must lie in reconnection to Witsuwit’en ways of knowing, being, and doing. The work happening today towards mobilizing Witsuwit’en jurisdiction over child welfare is for future generations. This research has attempted to expand upon the nascent literature regarding how Indigenous communities are approaching intergenerational trauma through cultural models of health and healing, as well as meeting the need for decolonizing and Indigenous methodologies that target community needs and strengths. This study provides a local analysis of a cultural approach to Indigenous healing and may offer themes and learning that can be transferable to other Indigenous communities in Canada and beyond.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.002 |
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".