EXPOSING THE CRACKS IN ABORIGINAL EDUCATION POLICY: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ONTARIO’S SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case study demonstrates through the lenses of critical theory and anticolonialism that Ontario’s compulsory Grades 6-9 Social Studies curriculum is written from a Euro-Canadian standpoint and gives little regard to Aboriginal perspectives. Despite the Ministry of Education’s antiracism and equity policies, the Ontario curriculum is tainted by stereotypes, Eurocentrisms, myths, and omissions. The curriculum is an impediment to the reconciliation that must occur between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in order to bring healing to Aboriginal communities. This thesis contributes to critical education research by showing that the Ontario curriculum is partially responsible for the ignorance that secondary school graduates possess regarding Aboriginal people. It offers recommendations to correct the flaws of the Ontario curriculum and to enhance the Aboriginal content. The implementation of these recommendations could allow the curriculum to fulfill its stated goals of fostering the development of students who will respect others, recognize stereotypes, and take a stand against racism.
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 | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.052 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".