Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this final chapter Melissa and Sandra pause to reflect on their relationship as co-editors, the collaborative process of writing the book, and what they have learned along the way from each other and from the other contributors to this work. They then invite readers into their own reflective process on their learning and unlearning throughout the book, attending to what they will carry forward and what questions or uncertainties remain for them. They revisit the “Calls to Action” from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada and some of the threads they have woven through the book, including understanding therapist positionalities (i.e., epistemologies, ontologies, and axiologies) as a foundation for embracing cultural humility and pluralism in ways of knowing, doing, and being, guided by the practice of Etuaptmumk, also known as Two-Eyed Seeing. Melissa and Sandra offer visual and written prompts to support readers in revisiting the eight pathways through which they have journeyed in the book, inviting them to consider which practices have been most meaningful or transformative for them. The authors revisit the practice of cultural humility as a foundation for remaining open to new learning and unlearning as a lifelong professional and personal commitment. Melissa reminds readers of the question she posed throughout the book: How am I being in this doing? Melissa and Sandra wrap up the chapter by introducing the concept of culture as medicine, reflecting again on the importance of decolonizing and Indigenizing counselling, psychology, and other healthcare theories and practices. They speak to endings as ceremony and invite readers to honour their transition in closing this chapter in their learning process. They each offer parting messages to readers.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".