Transitional Justice and the Task of Inclusion: A Habermasian Perspective on the Justification of Aboriginal Educational Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In February 2012, Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission released an interim report that detailed its findings based on extensive testimony by former students of the nation's residential school system, a system designed to forcibly assimilate aboriginal peoples. The report concludes that the state must play an active role in the restoration of indigenous culture and knowledge. It is against this background that Christopher Martin analyzes the idea of aboriginal educational rights. The concern here is not so much with aboriginal persons' right to a fair share of educational provision, but with the aboriginal person's right to reassert authority over his or her developmental interests, including an interest in culture and identity. The specific role of educational rights in such debates remains an important one, especially since such discussions impinge on difficult issues of state sovereignty and cultural rights. In this essay Martin examines various justifications of aboriginal educational rights and develops a Habermasian justification that remains consistent with individual rights.
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 | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.117 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".