Aboriginal Educational Teaching Experiences: Foregrounding Aboriginal/Indigenous
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginal studies in education is a relatively new phenomenon for many sites of learning in Canadian educational institutions from kindergarten to post-secondary settings, and adult education. This paper deals with how I developed my own academic work (teaching, research, and community service) to advance Aboriginal knowledges 1 and perspectives in education for teachers, university students, and other professionals interested in Aboriginal studies in education as a form of academic and professional development. The ways that Aboriginal/Indigenous knowledges and processes are foregrounded in my teaching is a particular focus of this writing. I contend that students go through a transformative experience as they learn (new knowledge for them) about another aspect of Canadian living (often ignored or misrepresented in curriculum): Aboriginal peoples ’ contemporary lived and contextualized experiences; socio-historic experiences with treaty making, oppressive policies, colonialism, and assimilation; needs and aspirations for safeguarding and advancing culturally relevant education, Aboriginal languages, cultures and spiritualities, philosophies, and more. Students learn to integrate this knowledge into their teaching responsibilities and they learn to value this
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".