Student success is facilitated by strong bonds between families and schools, including a shared sense of purpose and mutual trust. However, for Indigenous peoples these relationships are often broken, undermined by the legacy of residential schooling and assimilative educational practices. Drawing on interviews with 50 Indigenous (mainly Haudenosaunee, Anishinaabe, and Métis) and non-Indigenous parents and educators, this paper examines the ways in which issues of class and race shape interactions between teachers and Indigenous parents. The interviews reveal that legacies of racial discrimination against Indigenous peoples in schooling affect family/school relations among middle-class (MC) and lower-class (LC) parents in different ways. MC parents intensify relations with the school while, in comparison, LC parents tend to disengage as a consequence of their negative schooling experiences. Les relations étroites entre les familles et les écoles, et notamment leurs buts communs et leur confiance partagée, facilitent la réussite des étudiants. Toutefois, au sein des populations autochtones, ces liens sont pour la plupart rompus en raison des conséquences des pensionnats scolaires et des pratiques éducatives d'assimilation. Cette étude s'appuie sur des entretiens avec 50 parents et éducateurs issus de populations autochtones (principalement celles d'Haudenosaunee, d'Anishinaabe et de Métis) et non autochtones pour étudier la manière dont les questions de classe et de race affectent les interactions entre les enseignants et les parents issus de populations autochtones. Ces entretiens montrent que le passé discriminatoire des écoles envers les peuples autochtones a eu des répercussions différentes sur les relations famille/école, selon qu'il s'agisse de parents issus de la classe moyenne ou de parents issus d'un milieu pauvre. Les parents issus de la classe moyenne ont renforcé leurs liens avec l'école alors que les parents des classes inférieures tendent à se désengager du fait de leur expérience scolaire négative.

AimThis study will evaluate radiation medicine professionals’ perceptions of clinical and professional risks and benefits, and the evolving roles and responsibilities with artificial intelligence (AI).MethodsRadiation oncologists (ROs), medical physicists (MPs), treatment planners (TP-RTTs) and treatment delivery radiation therapists (TD-RTTs) at a cancer centre in preliminary stages of implementing an AI-enabled treatment planning system were invited to participate in uniprofessional focus groups. Semi-structured scripts addressed the perceptions of AI, including thoughts regarding changing roles and competencies. Sessions were audiorecorded, transcribed and coded thematically through consensus-building.ResultsA total of 24 participants (four ROs, five MPs, seven TP-RTTs and eight TD-RTTs) were engaged in four focus groups of 58 minutes average duration (range 54–61 minutes). Emergent themes addressed AI’s impact on quality of care, changing professional tasks and changing competency requirements. Time-consuming repetitive tasks such as delineating targets, generating treatment plans and quality assurance were thought conducive to offloading to AI. Outcomes data and adaptive planning would be incorporated into clinical decision-making. Changing workload would necessitate changing skills, prioritising plan evaluation over generation and increasing interprofessional communication. All groups discussed AI reducing the need for TP-RTTs, though displacement was thought more likely than replacement.ConclusionsIt is important to consider how professionals perceive AI to be proactive in informing change, as gains in quality and efficiency will require new workflows, skills and education.

The Ontario Ministry of Education has declared a commitment to Indigenous student success and has advanced a policy framework that articulates inclusion of Indigenous content in schooling curriculum (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2007). What are the perceptions among educators and parents regarding the implementation of policy directives, and what is seen to encourage or limit meaningful implementation? To answer these questions, this article draws on interviews with 100 Indigenous (mainly Haudenosaunee, Anishinaabe, and Métis) and non-Indigenous parents and educators from Ontario Canada. Policy directives are seen to benefit Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. Interviews also reveal challenges to implementing Indigenous curricular policy, such as unawareness and intimidation among non-Indigenous educators regarding how to teach material. Policy implications are considered.

Background e-Learning is an underutilized tool in education for the health professions, and radiation medicine, given its reliance on technology for clinical practice, is well-suited to training simulation in online environments. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the knowledge impact and user interface satisfaction of high- (hf) compared with low-fidelity (lf) e-learning modules (e-modules) in radiation oncology training.Methods Two versions of an e-module on lung radiotherapy (lf and hf) were developed. Radiation oncology residents and fellows were invited to be randomized to complete either the lf or the hf module through individual online accounts over a 2-week period. A 25-item multiple-choice knowledge assessment was administered before and after module completion, and user interface satisfaction was measured using the Questionnaire for User Interaction Satisfaction (quis) tool.Results Of 18 trainees, 8 were randomized to the lf module, and 10, to the hf module. Overall, knowledge assessment performance increased (11%, p < 0.05), with hf-group participants reporting a 13% improvement (p = 0.02), and senior participants reporting an almost 15% improvement (p < 0.01). Scores on the quis indicated that participants were satisfied with various aspects of the user interface.Conclusions The hf e-module had a greater impact on knowledge acquisition, and users expressed satisfaction with the interface in both the hf and lf situations. The use of e-learning in a competency-based curriculum could have educational advantages; participants expressed benefits and drawbacks. Preferences for e-learning integration in education for the health professions should be explored further.

The national Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada has challenged governments and school boards across Canada to acknowledge and address the damaging legacies of residential schooling while ensuring that all students gain an adequate understanding of relations between Indigenous Peoples and non-Indigenous peoples. This article explores the dynamics and prospects for effective change associated with reforms in elementary and secondary education systems since the release of the Commission’s Calls to Action, focusing on the policy frameworks employed by provincial and territorial governments to guide these actions. The analysis examines critically the overt and hidden messages conveyed through discourses within policy documents and statements. The key questions we address include: What do current education policy frameworks and actions regarding Indigenous Peoples reveal about government approaches to education and settler–Indigenous relationships in Canada? To what extent is effective reconciliation possible, and how can it be accomplished in the context of institutional structures and discourses within a White settler colonial society? The findings reveal that substantial movement towards greater acknowledgement of Indigenous knowledge systems and incorporation of Indigenous content continues to be subordinated to or embedded within Western assumptions, norms, and standards.