How do Indigenous Youth Want to Make their Mark?: Exploring the Resurgence and Generative Possibilities of Indigenous Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, an increasing number of Indigenous youth are embracing a movement known as resurgence, seeking to reclaim and regenerate their Indigenous cultures (Corntassel & Hardbadger, 2019). Concurrently, they are assuming leadership roles in movements like Idle No More, Land Back, and Indigenous and Black Lives Matter, demonstrating generativity, a concept traditionally associated with midlife but now recognized in younger populations (Blanchet-Cohen et al., 2023; Erikson, 1969; Lawford & Shulman, 2024). In response to this phenomenon, the Students Commission of Canada initiated the Make Your Mark conference, focusing on youth generativity and reconciliation. This study presents findings from two years of the Make Your Mark conference. The conference's first year explored youth experiences through surveys, questionnaires, and focus groups, revealing nuances in Indigenous youth's expression of generativity. Building on these insights, the second year delved into Indigenous youth's resurgence within reconciliation spaces. Through activities like sharing circles and photovoice, it became evident that Indigenous youth engage in cultural practices to redefine their identities, revitalize their cultures, and ensure its survival. This research highlights the pivotal role of Indigenous youth in cultural preservation and social change within spaces of reconciliation, emphasizing the importance of understanding and supporting their resurgence and generative capacities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".