MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057875756 · doi:10.1163/157181811x612873

Indigenous Children’s Rights: A Sociological Perspective on Boarding Schools and Transracial Adoption

2012· article· en· W2057875756 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Madeline H. Engel, Norma Kolko Phillips, Frances A. DellaCava

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Children s Rights · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousAcculturationSociologyWelfarePerspective (graphical)Gender studiesLawCriminologyEconomic growthSocial sciencePolitical scienceEthnic groupEconomicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sociological analysis of policies related to boarding schools and transracial adoption of indigenous children in Canada, the U.S.A., Australia and New Zealand, between the 1860s and the 1980s, demonstrates the similarity of the outcome of these programmes. While undertaken in the name of protection and/or acculturation, these policies and programmes resulted in trauma to the children, their families, and their cultures, as well as in abuses that were in violation of children’s rights as defined by international organizations, in particular the United Nations. Examination of the profound consequences of boarding schools and transracial adoption during this historical period can serve as a guide to humane, effective, and culturally sensitive child welfare policies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.028
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Children s RightsSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207