MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1907925732 · doi:10.1080/1536710x.2015.1068260

Jordan's Principle and Indigenous Children with Disabilities in Canada: Jurisdiction, Advocacy, and Research

2015· article· en· W1907925732 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shelly Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousJurisdictionPsychologyPolitical scienceCriminologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses Indigenous (1) (1)In this article, the terms Indigenous, First Nations, Aboriginal, and Treaty Indian are used interchangeably, and as needed to describe the political reality of the First Peoples of Canada. children with disabilities in Canada and examines their experiences with federal and provincial jurisdictional and funding disputes. It explores Canada's adversarial legal and policy techniques to delay implementation and funding of Jordan's Principle, a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal action seeking to address the delays, and the recommendations of a recent independent Canadian research project. Finally, it suggests ways to advance Jordan's Principle in Canada and elsewhere.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social Work in Disability & RehabilitationSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207