MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982954917 · doi:10.1080/0145935x.2013.859903

Student-to-Student Abuse in the Indian Residential Schools in Canada: Setting the Stage for Further Understanding

2013· article· en· W1982954917 on OpenAlexaffabout
Grant Charles, Mike DeGagné

Bibliographic record

VenueChild & Youth Services · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHealing Foundation
KeywordsMainstreamConceptualizationSexual abuseSociologyPedagogyResidential schoolFoundation (evidence)PsychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSuicide preventionPoison controlMedicineSocioeconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Indian residential school system in Canada was established to assimilate Aboriginal children into mainstream society by removing the “Indian within them.” In the past 20 years survivors of the schools have come forward with stories of physical and sexual abuse perpetrated against them by staff. However, what is significantly less spoken of is the abuse which occurred between students. The Aboriginal Healing Foundation recently held a small gathering of survivors, Elders, advocates, and researchers to discuss ways to bring this issue into the open. This article comes out of the discussions held at the gathering. Within the article we offer a conceptualization of the dynamics and processes of student to student abuse within the Indian residential schools in Canada with the hope that it will encourage a deeper discussion of this issue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0450.024
Scholarly communication0.0130.005
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild & Youth ServicesSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207