Review of <i> Science and Native American Communities: Legacies of Pain, Visions of Promise</i> Edited by Keith James
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Science and Native American Communities, a provocative collection of essays from an unprecedented 1997 conference of Native American professionals in academia, science, engineering, and health sciences, explores "the uneasy meeting ground" between Western science and traditional wisdom. Education, particularly in the sciences, is not value-neutral to Native peoples. Rather than education's poster children, many of the text's nineteen contributors are survivors of failed educational experiments: mission schools, boarding schools, externally imposed values, forced relocations. To editor Keith James (Onondaga), a professor of psychology, "Education has historically been associated with physical and sexual abuse and the emotional and cultural battery of Indian people." Told by a mission school guidance counselor, "You are average; you will never go to college," Gerri Shangreaux (Oglala Lakota) was relocated by the BIA from Pine Ridge to Los Angeles to train as a nurse's aide. A professor of nursing, Shangreaux, like most contributors, weaves a touching personal story into her professional commentary, which makes for compelling reading. To James Lujan (Taos Pueblo), Dean of Instruction at Southwest Indian Polytechnic Institute, the biggest issue facing Native America is "helping Indians manage and integrate competing world views." Science and Native American Communities pulses with the personal and social tensions of that struggle.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".