Jerry White, Dan Beavon, and Nicholas Spence, Eds.: Aboriginal Well-Being: Canada's Continuing Challenge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jerry White, Dan Beavon, and Nicholas Spence, eds. Aboriginal Well-Being: Canada's Continuing Challenge. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing, 2007. 246 pp. $36.95 sc. The volume is one of a series of publications produced by the Aboriginal Policy Research Consortium which is housed at the University of Western Ontario and headed by Dr. Jerry White. While the goal of this book is to provide the reader with information on the health and of Aboriginal people in Canada, it approaches the topic from a methodological perspective. Put another way, while the reader will certainly learn about the of Aboriginal people, the authors are really focused on trying to develop appropriate, comparative, and reliable measures of well-being. There is some contextual information about Aboriginal people in Canada, but the authors are more focused on developing a set of indicators. Why do I mention this? I do so because the reader needs to be forewarned so that s/he not approach the manuscript with expectations that will not be fulfilled. However, it is an ambitious volume concerned with the analysis of the of Aboriginal groups in Canada as well as around the world. The work is truly exceptional on many counts. The book's wide comparative breadth, the methodological sophistication, the up-to-date references, and the critical analysis of the data make this book a notable accomplishment. The book is a wonderful compilation of information regarding the of Aboriginal people in Canada and in other settler societies. Given that the chapters are written by different authors, who in turn use different measures of specific comparisons are difficult. Nevertheless, data from the census, administrative units, e.g., Indian Affairs, and other sources are used to empirically assess the concept of well-being. Throughout the book, the authors acknowledge these methodological issues and focus on patterns and trends that illuminate the results. The authors, having access to data that might not otherwise be available to other researchers, make the best use of their databases as they mine the data to its fullest. The volume is comprised of ten chapters placed within three parts. The first part introduces the concept of well-being and introduces general theoretical and methodological issues that researchers have to deal with when measuring the concept. This section provides an excellent theoretical discussion of the concept of well-being, why it is important, why it needs to be measured at different levels, and the implications of introducing such a concept into the language when dealing with Aboriginal people. Part 2 looks at a Registered Indian Human Development Index and considers changes that have taken place between 1981 and 2001. This section also examines sex equality and well-being. Finally, it provides a four-country (Australia, Canada, United States, New Zealand) comparison of Aboriginal people's well-being. Part 3 moves to a more macro level of analysis and focuses on developing a community index. This section begins by outlining what a community index is, why it is important, and how one might empirically measure it. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".