MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2338169369 · doi:10.14288/1.0105884

The juvenile court in British Columbia : an evaluation of the juvenile courts, the probation services, and other associated facilities in British Columbia, 1960.

2011· article· en· W2338169369 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donald John Blacklock

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenileJuvenile courtCriminologyLawPolitical scienceJuvenile delinquencySociologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subject of the thesis is an evaluation of the existing juvenile court services in British Columbia. The objective is to assess whether the intent of the founding legislators has been realized, and also whether the court achieves currently-recognized standards in its organization and operation. The legislative intent underlying the Juvenile Delinquents Act of Canada, and the Juvenile Courts Act of British Columbia is defined, in so far as this is possible. References are cited on standards for the organization of the court, judges, probation officers, diagnostic and treatment facilities, and juvenile court committees. A descriptive account of the juvenile court in British Columbia is built up from interviews with officials of the Provincial Probation Service and the Vancouver Juvenile Court, reports of the activities of various services associated with the juvenile court, and correspondence with the Attorney-General's Department. The evidence gathered indicates that one of the primary purposes behind the original formation of the juvenile court in Canada, the keeping of children out of adult jails, has not yet, been achieved in British Columbia, except in the largest urban centres. It shows too that the courts, which have been legally established in a very large number of communities, lack any well-defined standards for the appointment of judges, and any objective means for ascertaining the suitability of those who are appointed. Probation services, vital to the effective operation of the court, are non-existent in some areas, and carry excessive work loads where they do exist. The diagnostic services available to the courts do not measure up to suggested standards. The study also shows that institutional treatment facilities are limited in scope, restricted in programme, and overcrowded. Except for the probationer, no other non-institutional treatment resources are available on a formally-organized basis. The evaluation shows a need for broad legislative changes which would make possible the attainment of high standards of performance. One possible way is through the creation of district courts with full-time judges. The study shows the need for defining qualifications for judges and other court personnel, and establishing means of achieving these standards. It shows too the need for periodic post-enactment evaluations of legislation to determine whether statutes are achieving the purposes for which they were enacted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→