Building Relationships from Our Past and for Our Future: Community Research as Reconciliation from within Métis Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this dissertation, stories of Métis ways of knowing and being together and reconciliation have been interwoven together with stories of my own journey back home to my community in Western Canada to create practical results in and through a community-based research project. To do this work, I collaborated with Métis women across British Columbia, Canada, in a decolonizing and Indigenous community-led research project. Guiding this project are interweaving goals of fostering reconciliation within Métis communities by using a decolonizing methodology that goes beyond theoretical critique to produce practical results with and for Métis communities. Key questions guiding this research include those relating to how social scientific inquiry can benefit Métis communities, how Métis ways of knowing and cultural practices can contribute to reconciliation locally, and decolonizing possibilities for doing sport studies research as reconciliation. Taking these as guides, in the current study, I weave community-based methods and Indigenous perspectives together to envision decolonizing futures with and for our local communities. Rooted in Métis ways of being and being together, these methods of knowledge co-creation include collaborative, decolonizing, and Indigenous-led community-based methods, such as community consultations, as well as sharing and visioning circles. Towards practical results, the primary contributions of this dissertation project are collaborative developments of practical results for reconciliation from within Métis communities. For this, cultural resources materials, as well as action plans were co-created with Métis educators, artists, and community leaders. In addition to the primary contribution of practical implications for Métis communities, the current dissertation also outlines pedagogical implications, as well as scholarly implications for doing research as reconciliation from within the sport studies scholarship.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".