Ur historiens dunkel - En studie om urinvånarperspektiv i historieundervisningen på högstadiet och gymnasiet. ! ! Temin och år: Vt 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this essay is to examine the possibilities of an integrated indigenous perspective in the Swedish\nhistory curriculum for secondary school. Looking at progress made in Alberta, Canada, where a new movement has\nbegun to change the curriculum in accordance with Canadian indigenous traditions, this essay will discuss the\nimplementation of a similar change in Sweden. This is achieved through the dual lenses of postcolonial history-\nwriting, in an amalgamation of the writings of Tesfahuney and Trenter, as well as Winter and Jørgsensens take on\ndiscourse theory. While both the Swedish and Canadian teachers questioned, expressed the potential of an integrated\nindigenous perspective in the curriculum, teachers of both countries pointed out the practical difficulties of\nintegrating such a perspective in a curriculum not suited for it. A few of the Canadian teachers tried to solve this\nproblem, by trying to fundamentally alter the nature of the courses given and put indigenous traditions at the center\nof the curriculum. We also discuss the potential of the Swedish curriculums on these points, and how a more\nincluding history education could be implemented in the Swedish school system.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".