The standardization of Inuktut in the education system in Nunavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis describes the issues and various efforts involved in the standardization of\nInuktut in Nunavut. It provides a background, history and literature review related to\nstandardization of the language, as well as an autoethnographic account of my own\nteaching and promotion of Inuktut. In addition, Inuktut-speaking teachers across\nNunavut were invited to participate by responding to a questionnaire designed to\ninvestigate the attitudes of the teachers towards dialectal differences and language\nstandardization in Nunavut. The research serves as a resource to promote understanding\nand awareness of the major dialects in Nunavut as well as provide considerations about\nwhich dialect might be most appropriate and readily accepted by Inuit teachers as „the\ndialect of instruction‟ in the future. The survey results provide important information\nfor Inuit Uqausinginnik Taiguusiliuqtiit, the Inuit Language Authority in Nunavut, with\na mandate to consider standardization of Inuktut writing for the Territory. The research\nalso has implications for the Government of Nunavut, and particularly for the\nCurriculum and School Services Division of the Department of Education and for inservice\nprofessional learning for current teachers of Inuktut. In addition the Nunavut\nTeacher Education Program and Nunavut Arctic College may find the research useful in\ntheir Inuktut programs. All these agencies have a stake in the successful implementation\nof new standards for Inuktut to ensure it is effectively taught to students at all levels\nacross Nunavut. The National Strategy on Inuit Education (2011) led by the Inuit\nTapiriit Kanatami includes the standardization of Inuktut as a priority across the four\nInuit regions in Canada and the results may benefit efforts to implement the National\nStrategy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".