Inherent Acts of Self-determination: Administrative Control of Elementary Education at Six Nations, 1960-2005
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I collaborate with Elders of the Six Nations of the Grand River Territory – mainly former vice-principals and principals – to share their stories about elementary school administration of the community’s day schools of the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, and of the larger consolidated schools thereafter. By engaging in storywork with them, their stories reveal that as Indigenous organizations like the National Indian Brotherhood/Assembly of First Nations (NIB/AFN) warned First Nations about mistaking administrative control, or delegated authority as it framed it, as real, local control over their children’s education, vice-principals and principals in Six Nations reframed it as inherent acts of self-determination and sovereignty over education. Drawing on Audra Simpson’s nested sovereignty, and Glen Sean Coulthard’s self-recognition to produce a more accurate representation of administrative control in the community, the author argues that vice-principals and principals in Six Nations did not mistake their practice as delegated authority but instead – as inherently sovereign actors – went through a process of negotiating self-determination and sovereignty within the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada’s (DIAND) educational framework to upset its status quo of First Nations only managing educational programs and services. If sovereignty is understood to be a process, rather than a destination as Robert Allen Warrior suggests, then vice-principals and principals exercising administrative control on a daily basis in their schools should be recognized as inherently self-determining and sovereign. By sharing their stories, they reveal that they possess the authority to determine the definition and character of administrative control at the local level. The argument’s implication being that there are alternative ways of knowing and understanding administrative control in First Nations schools, rather than the national discourse that evolved in the decades following the NIB’s Indian Control of Indian Education.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".