Finding their way home: The reunification of First Nations adoptees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entire generations of First Nations people have been separated from their birth families and tribes by historical acts of relocation, boarding schools, and the adoption era. Reunification is an essential component to rebuilding the First Nations population. It is echoed across tribes captured by the phrase, “generation after generation we are coming home” (White Hawk, 2014). The purpose of this study was to investigate personal and social identity indicators that contribute to a satisfactory reunification for 95 First Nations adult adoptees who were separated from their birth families during childhood by foster-care and/or adoption. Retrospective survey data originated from the Experiences of Adopted and Fostered Individuals Project. The overall model of satisfactory reunification was statistically significant, and explained 16.6% of the total variance. The study’s findings revealed two social identity variables were statistically significant in relation to the reunification experience – high social connection to tribe (positive relationship) and reunification with the birthmother (negative relationship). First Nations adoptees have not only a biological/birth family to return to, but also a tribe, and ancestral land. Components of social identity are particularly important for the reunification process of First Nations adoptees. Reconnection with extended family and social connection to tribe play a critical role in bettering the reunification experience from the adoptee’s perspective.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".