Access to formal education among the Canadian Inuit : how increasing Inuit autonomy would benefit education outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous peoples have been residing in Canada for more than five thousand years. In northern Canada, these peoples were mostly nomadic, interacting with one another through trade, marriage and, occasionally, warfare. The education of children was a task borne by all members of the community, and children learned practical skills such as sewing, hunting and cooking, in order to follow in the footsteps of their Elders and serve their community. After colonization, Inuit communities were placed under the governance of the Canadian government, which resulted in them moving to a sedentary lifestyle Their schooling was moved to a governed institutionwhere they learned almost exclusively from Catholic nuns and non-Indigenous teachers, rather than all members of the community. Though these Inuit communities were not formally under the oversight of the Indian Act, they were forced into the residential school system, where many suffered physical, sexual or psychological abuses. These traumas have had echoing effects into the current generation. Moreover, Inuit youth of today have suffered loss of culture and language, and they are, in many cases, unable to complete their formal education. This research elaborates on the effects of this loss of culture and educational challenges, as well as on possible solutions to remedy some of the difficulties created by the residential school system and colonization by increasing autonomy throughout Inuit communities
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".