Gikinoo'amaagowin Anishinaabeg (Teaching the Anishinaabe People)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis analyzes the roles and responsibilities of Anishinaabe Ogichidaakwe (woman warrior) using Anishinaabe and Western methodologies. As an Anishinaabekwe I use Anishinaabe language to engage in my responsibility to learn and share the language. In this thesis I move in and out of two different ways of knowing adapting to two epistemologies. While moving between Anishinaabe and Western epistemologies I located an ethical space where my spiritually connected and culturally grounded perspective is recognized. I examine and reconstruct the political/leadership, social, and spiritual roles and responsibilities of Ogichidaakwe over a critical period of change, 1632 to 1871. Anishinaabe leadership knowledge and practice experienced a shift as the Anishinaabeg community adapted to the experience of European contact. This shift is recognized after braiding together literature that is outlined in my thesis as the shift, colonial impact and absence. Of particular interest are women-based Aadizookaanag (Anishinaabe narrative with a scared being or spirit in it) and women-based Aadizookaanan (Anishinaabe narratives and ancient stories), and how these narratives are connected to Ogichidaakweg roles and responsibilities. I interconnect the Jiisikaan (shake tent), ethnohistorical, and historical as methodological approaches in my research in search of Debwewin (truth). Therefore, both the content and methodology of this thesis adds to the body of knowledge to the field of Indigenous Studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".