Wyi Wah! Mamaskacikiwey Itota: An Integration of Indigenous Culture and Academics at a Manitoba High School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous student success has been a long-standing challenge for schools in Manitoba, as in other areas of Canada. This Dissertation-in-Practice examines the central question of how a high school that employs the same programming for all students has been effective with non-Indigenous students but has struggled to engage and assist Indigenous students. Albeit from different perspectives, Indigenous caregivers, their children, and the staff who support those students, agree that change is necessary. Research is clear that student voice is a necessary component of school success. It also points to the concept of Two-Eyed Seeing, the desire of Indigenous caregivers to see academic and cultural competencies included in their children’s programming. Thus, building caregiver advocacy skills is another factor for success although when juxtaposed against the inter-generational trauma caused by Canada’s Residential School system it becomes apparent that these actions may be much easier said than done. At the same time, the need for schools to listen far more, ask themselves questions, understand how ‘nothing for us, without us’ applies, and operate with an ethic of hospitality to create spaces for Indigenous students to succeed is important. To reach these goals, a change plan co-authored by all participant groups is needed. The work of this paper has been intended to extend thinking for school and system leaders on how schools can become more engaging and welcoming places for Indigenous students to succeed within, open to communicating with students and caregivers. To satisfy this end goal would be to inch closer to fulfilling the Calls to Action set forth by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada as well as the United Nations Declaration of Rights for Indigenous Peoples.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".