Intégration des approches pédagogiques autochtones dans l'enseignement de la philosophie occidentale : une interrogation critique face à l'appel de décoloniser nos pratiques d'enseignement universitaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article a pour but de montrer comment des approches pédagogiques autochtones peuvent être intégrées dans l’enseignement de la philosophie occidentale. Plus précisément, en mettant l’emphase sur la pratique et la réflexion, l’article cherche à présenter, à partir d’une courte présentation de la méthodologie et de ce qu’est la philosophie occidentale, certains principes qui devraient animer l’enseignement de cette discipline, et certains exemples concrets de pratiques utiles. D’autres pratiques possibles sont aussi discutées, ainsi que certaines contraintes qui restreignent la mise en action de celles-ci. Se plaçant dans une position d’humilité, les auteurs, non-autochtones, désirent répondre à l’appel à décoloniser les pratiques pédagogiques colonialistes, pour cheminer authentiquement vers la réconciliation.
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 | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".