Defining and reclaiming traditional Indigenous child rearing practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aims to document traditional Indigenous child rearing practices and seek guidance on the reclamation of those practices to inform the development of supportive family programs. Parents have a lasting influence on their children’s wellbeing, though not all populations have the same opportunities for raising their children in values and culturally aligned ways. Indigenous families in Canada currently experience intergenerational effects of culturally oppressive policies and discriminatory practices within the social systems. Though traditional Indigenous child rearing practices have been eroded through these colonial acts, resurgence of knowledge and reclamation of these practices hold potential to increase pride in cultural identity resulting in increased well-being of Indigenous families and communities. With a focus on conversational storytelling methods, five qualitative interviews were conducted with traditional Knowledge Keepers in the Manitoba region (Treaty Territories 1, 2, 4, 5). Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis and reflected on through interpretive meaning making. Consistent with these qualitative approaches and Indigenous research methods, the aims of analyses were to develop insights within and across interviews based on my own subjective experience and positionality as an Indigenous mother, in a reflective capacity to how it applies to my life and also in a reflexive capacity of how my beliefs have shaped my views of the interview content. Abbreviated transcripts are provided such that future readers may learn and develop their own unique insights from the wisdom and stories shared by traditional Knowledge Keepers on this topic. Results revealed processes involved in the passing on of teachings which promote family bonding, respect, functioning, and passing down of traditional practices such as infant and child ceremony, examples of cultural child rearing beliefs including the sacredness and centering of the child in the community, and the importance of intergenerational relationships in the care of children. This study will contribute to a growing understanding within the family psychology and child development literatures about traditional Indigenous cultural content and lay groundwork for the creation of parenting programs for Indigenous families. This study can contribute to all reader’s own knowledge about Indigenous world views and practices.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".