Canadian First Nations Child Welfare Care Policy: Managing Money in "Ottawapiskat"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inter-generational loss of Indigenous identity in Canada has been a result of Canadian Aboriginal policy in the past and present. The policies of the residential school era and the policies of today’s child welfare system lead to similar outcomes, particularly governmental determination of how the next generation of First Nations people are affected by the state. By 1997-1998, the Department of Indian and Native Affairs reported that First Nations child and family services were administering services to 70% of children on reserves, and that number was projected to increase to 91% by 2002. In 1940 when the residential school system was still in full use, there were almost 8,000 children in the schools across the country; compare that statistic to the year 2002 when there were over 22,500 First Nations children in the child welfare system, showing a progression of almost three times the number living in state care. The numerous social problems resulting from poverty are re-enforced by the Federal Government’s policy decision to neglect taking action despite their own commissions and research data. Procedural problems in child welfare administration arise due to government jurisdictions, which will also be discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".