The current state is a crime: Decolonizing experiential education on the Brock University campus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous ways of knowing and being have always been experiential. With this, our Canadian post-secondary institutions that have been working to grow experiential education and experiential learning opportunities have an obligation to acknowledge these Indigenous roots in order to avoid further appropriation. With two thirds of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of Canada’s 94 calls to action focused on education, including post-secondary, the Ontario Government has also recommended that post-secondary institutions in the province provide students with a minimum of two experiential learning opportunities within their academic courses by the time they graduate. This Participatory Action Research (PAR) project at Brock University was designed and executed in full collaboration with Indigenous peoples and looks at a campus with a focus on decolonization as well as experiential learning through an Appreciative Inquiry framework to best determine how experiential education can be decolonized. Using semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and institutional documents that speak to the current state of experiential learning as well as institutional strategic goals, ten themes were developed. These highlight settler tendencies, the current state of experiential education, recommendations for decolonization and an ideal future state, important approaches to consider when decolonizing as an individual and as a campus, cautions to heed, as well as values and emotions to consider. In order to decolonize experiential learning and the campus authentically, Indigenous voices must be and have been amplified in this process.
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 | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".