Teachers' experiences creating and delivering Indigenous curricula on Prince Edward Island in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis endeavoured to gain insight into how the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (TRC) recommendations regarding curriculum development is being implemented in the Prince Edward Island (PEI) Education System. Many non-Indigenous educators have struggled to respond to the TRC Calls to Action by creating and teaching curricula with Indigenous content. Since the data relies on teachers’ unique experiences, a qualitative methodology was employed using semi-structured interviews. With a focus on teachers working in junior high schools on PEI, the research found that if teachers are to create and deliver Indigenous curricula as intended by the TRC Calls to Action, they must develop a strong conceptual framework and clearer perspectives, which include becoming more familiar with and exposed to Indigenous culture, understanding what it means to be an Indigenous ally and using their privilege to give voice to those who do not have a space to be heard. It was found that when delivering the curriculum, their approach is most effective when they teach from an Indigenous perspective and employ a diversity of teaching styles, including the use of videos, literature, group discussions, field trips and guest speakers. Systemic challenges faced by the teachers include not having a mandated Indigenous curriculum and not knowing how to integrate Indigenous content into the current curriculum; classroom-based challenges include not having enough time to teach the Indigenous curriculum and not knowing where to find authentic resources representing Indigenous perspectives. The thesis recommends creating a provincial Indigenous curriculum in collaboration with the Indigenous community and creating an Indigenous Learning Centre to facilitate the Indigenous educational process on PEI. Finally, it is hoped that this research will inspire teachers and give them practical ideas as they take up the task of teaching Indigenous curricula. As steps are taken in the education system to implement the TRC recommendations, richer experiences will be generated and the process of reconciliation will steadily advance.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".