MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7039031064

Investigating the concept of success in the Bachelor of Education in Indigenous Language Revitalization Program in the WSÁNEĆ Community and at the University of Victoria

2021· dissertation· en· W7039031064 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNutrition, Health, and Society Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousIndigenous languageParticipatory action researchLanguage revitalizationTraditional knowledgeAction researchNative-language instructionBachelor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous languages account for many of the languages worldwide and, importantly, they help to maintain Indigenous knowledge and epistemologies. However, many of these languages will not be handed down to future generations. Given this, language revitalization programs are designed to preserve and revitalize endangered languages as well as equip language revitalizers with the capabilities to teach those languages and explore methods to marry non-Indigenous and Indigenous knowledges. Currently, language revitalization programs are investigated for their success in providing for the linguistic and pedagogical needs of the people involved in the programs. In Canada, approaches to maintain and preserve Indigenous languages are developed via Indigenous language revitalization programs through consultation with Indigenous knowledge keepers about their languages and pedagogies. The Bachelor of Education in Indigenous Language Revitalization (BEDILR) program is offered at the University of Victoria and the W̱SÁNEĆ community in British Columbia, where it focuses on the W̱SÁNEĆ epistemology and revitalizes the SENĆOŦEN language. This doctoral research examined the concept of success in the BEDILR program for the W̱SÁNEĆ people. In doing so, the researcher conducted participatory action research (PAR) as well as semi-structured interviews to collect data from five academic and community participants in the W̱SÁNEĆ community and the University of Victoria. Next, the researcher followed Owen’s (1984) thematic network to analyze the data for codes and themes. Findings suggest there are four themes of Indigenous person, approach of the BEDILR program, Indigenous pedagogy, and assessment and seven sub-themes of method, approach dynamics, Indigenous pedagogy of language of instruction, content of the program, and objectives of the program, assessor from inside community and external assessor for the W̱SÁNEĆ community participants. Also, there were four themes of Indigenous person, approach, pedagogy, and assessment and six sub-themes of method, approach dynamics, content of the program, objectives of the program, assessor, and what to assess for the academic participant. Specifically, participants in this study believed the BEDILR is a successful language revitalization program because it incorporates Indigenous pedagogy and follows an approach and assessment method based on the W̱SÁNEĆ worldviews, knowledge, epistemology, and the SENĆOŦEN language.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Same topicNutrition, Health, and Society StudiesFrench-language works237,207