Beyond inclusion: Transforming the educational governance relationships between First Nations and school districts in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dissertation is a philosophical and historical investigation of the political and ethical relationships between cultures as they attempt to develop just governance practices in post-colonial educational institutions. It is grounded in 30 years of personal experience and professional practice as an educator in British Columbia. The development of a Community Healing Circle process is initially described as a co-constructed means for the sharing of responsibility for First Nations students in their educational experiences. The Circle is placed within the context of a history of First Nations people of the Cariboo- Chilcotin, primarily after contact with Euro-Canadian society, followed by a consideration of relevant philosophic thought. Charles Taylor's ideas on the politics of recognition, and its relation to identity, forms the theoretical location upon which the dissertation is based. Taylor's 'modern social imaginaries' provides a way of conceptualizing the interaction between Euro-Canadian and First Nations views of today's world. In this way, the forms of difference between 'others' are explored and articulated so the richness of difference can be fully acknowledged. Beyond the investigation of the significant cultural differences and communicative challenges, the dissertation also identifies the ground upon which ethical communication and the building of community capacity can take place. James Tully's work on a 'common ground,' Nancy Fraser's ideas about claims for recognition and redistribution, Jiirgen Habermas' thinking about communicative ethics, and Seyla Benhabib's writings about diversity in the global era, are all interwoven into the fabric of the discussion. Finally, the study returns to a consideration of the Community Healing Circle as a forum in which different cultural partners can engage and contend with each other over substantive educational issues. In the conclusion there are suggestions about how we might proceed to transform the educational governance relationship between First Nations and the dominant polity, creating a more just form.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".