Decolonizing Discipline: Children, Corporal Punishment, Christian Theologies, and Reconciliation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This edited collection brings an interdisciplinary, while mostly theologically driven, perspective to decolonization and reconciliation by examining corporal punishment in a Christian context. Building on a two-day symposium held at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, in 2017, the editors bring together some involved with the symposium and new voices to build on the “Christian Theological Statement in Support of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Call to Action 6,” which was generated through the symposium. Overall, the book focuses on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s (TRC) Call to Action 6 to repeal section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada, which “justifies the use of corporal punishment by parents and those standing in the place of parents” (1–2). All the chapters are anchored by chapter 1, written by Reverend Mark MacDonald, which situates Canada’s residential school system within “the broader systemic evil that is called colonialism” (18) as well as the church’s role in this evil.The book opens with an introduction from the editors as well as a copy of the “Christian Theological Statement.” There are another nineteen chapters divided into four sections. Section 1 provides context for Call to Action 6, including psychology research on corporal punishment, childhood reflections on experiences of abuse, as well as a critical discussion of the systems of power that pervaded the residential school system. This section is well suited for readers in child and youth studies, Indigenous studies, as well as nonacademic audiences (i.e., parents). Section 2 presents “Christian Theological Reflections on Corporal Punishment,” including discussions and reflections on well-known scripture that has provided the rationale for corporal punishment in some places and times (65). This section is well suited for audiences in religious studies but also Christian families interested in a perspective of discipline that does not involve corporal punishment. Section 3 includes traditional Indigenous perspectives on parenting and discipline, positive parenting, as well as spirituality among children and would be of interest to those in Indigenous studies, education, child and youth studies, and religious studies. Section 4 returns to the foundation of the book, the “Christian Theological Statement,” to present a vision of reconciliation that focuses on the well-being of children and youth.Much of the book provides a Christian rereading of scripture regarding corporal punishment, which it connects to the treatment of Indigenous children in residential schools and colonial policy more broadly. The book is unique in its appeal to diverse audiences, including child and youth studies, psychology, religious studies, Indigenous studies, and nonacademic audiences—notably parents, Christian or not, interested in progressive discipline.The book provides insight into the positive and negative experiences of Indigenous youth in Canada and globally, both inside and outside residential schools, while focusing on the Canadian context. The editors could be critiqued for the chapters’ diverse writing styles and purposes, including literature reviews, personal testimonies, sermon exemplars, and more, but this contributes to its strength as a book that appeals to many audiences. Furthermore, the way in which the sections are organized adds to the overall rationale of the book and the way it works toward a vision of reconciliation that upholds child well-being. With the purpose to present a case for the TRC’s Call to Action 6, the editors effectively bring together firsthand experiences and scholarly literature to provide an important entry into conversation about the lack of congruity between the use of corporal punishment in the church and its relationship to colonialism.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».