Indian Residential Schools as Seen Through House of Commons Debates, 1876-1951
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legally mandated in the 1884 amendment to The Indian Act (1876) by the Canadian federal government, the Indian Residential School (IRS) system forcibly removed at least 150,000 Indigenous children from their homes and communities, many of whom experienced physical, emotional, and sexual abuse at the hands of their "caregivers."The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's (2015) conclusion that the Canadian government willfully engaged in cultural genocide while administering the IRS program suggests that the government purposefully endeavoured to cause harm to the children in its care.Considering the fastidious records kept by the federal government concerning Indigenous populations, their movement, and where they lived, it seems peculiar that they the Canadian government as a whole, but members of parliament in particular, were unaware of how Indigenous children were treated.The purpose of this brief paper is to demonstrate how Members of Parliament serving from 1876-1951 were a) aware of the deplorable conditions in Indian Residential Schools during the aforementioned period, and b) despite this knowledge, did nothing about it.In doing so, this paper will elucidate how the Canadian government willfully committed cultural genocide.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.057 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".