1 The Case for First Nation Education Authorities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginals had occupied what is now Canadian territory many millennia prior to European contact. While their pre-contact life was far from idyllic, post-contact Aboriginal history has been marked by traumatic social crises. By late-19th century, Canada’s Aboriginal population had been everywhere pushed to the margins, geographically and socially. Over the last half-century, Canadian governments have undertaken to redress past policies of discrimination. There has been progress: the life-expectancy gap with non-Aboriginals has narrowed; Aboriginal education levels have risen; more Aboriginals successfully participate in mainstream urban society; First Nation institutions exercise greater autonomy. But Aboriginal poverty continues to overlie any discussion of Aboriginal policy. One of the most important means to alleviate poverty and marginalization is via improved education outcomes. Other factors – including discrimination in the case of Aboriginals – matter, but in an industrial society, no community can prosper until the overwhelming majority achieve reasonable rungs on the education ladder, starting with high school certification. A high school diploma is a low rung. For a majority in any
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 | 0.016 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.005 |
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".