MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W75197623 · doi:10.3138/topia.26.212

Re-Centring Indigenous Ideas

2011· article· en· W75197623 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Pauline Wakeham

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentringIndigenousSociologyEngineeringBiologyMechanical engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada deliberately echoes—with a strategic difference—Tom Flanagan’s contro-versial book First Nations? Second Thoughts, which argued against Aboriginal self-determination. Almost one decade later, this new collection of essays resoundingly displaces the unmitigated Eurocentrism of Flanagan’s assimilationist agenda by asserting the primary importance of Indigenous epistemologies and intellectual debate in Canada. In particular, the volume is concerned with the broad reach of Indigenous thought, examining its impact “on Canadian public discourse ” and in “public institutions ” (1). Respecting the capacious potential of Indigenous thought to exceed the limits of disciplinary boundaries, the book features the work of a range of intellectuals writing from within and beyond the fields of education, his-tory, anthropology, health, and Indigenous politics and governance. First Nations, First Thoughts also attends to the varied locations of intellectual labour, highlight-ing contributions from writers working within (and often negotiating multiple positionalities across) academia, government and Indigenous cultural and political institutions. In her introduction, editor Annis May Timpson, director of the Centre of Cana-dian Studies at the University of Edinburgh, outlines the objectives and organiza-tion of the collection. The essays, Timpson asserts, collectively “encourage ” readers “to look closely at the development of Indigenous thought, to consider its impact on Canada, to assess current realities of integrating Indigenous thought into Canadian institutions, and to pursue intellectual interpretations that take Aborig-inal perspectives into full account ” (14). In this context, the collection aspires to nothing less than furthering “the ongoing process of decolonization in Canada” (1). While such goals are urgent and laudable, some of the language Timpson employs to frame this project—namely, the repeated invocation of the terms “inte-gration ” and “absorption ” (in phrases such as “the institutional absorption of Indigenous thought”)—does not do justice to the stakes of the task at hand (3). In

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0250.053
Scholarly communication0.0170.007
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207