Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation project explores a phenomenon known as the Sixties Scoop and some of its consequences as told by survivors through their own oral testimony. The Sixties Scoop was a period of aggressive adoption of Indigenous children in Canada and the United States in the 1960s. The Sixties Scoop did not happen in a vacuum; it was part of an ongoing attempt at genocide against Indigenous peoples of the Americas. This study is situated within the history in the eastern Maritimes of genocidal attempts towards the Wabanakis, the Indigenous peoples of the Maritimes. First hand accounts of sailors, traders, soldiers, missionaries and settlers describe observations, interactions and policies. The far-reaching effects of The Indian Act, passed in 1876, are also addressed. Survivors of the Sixties Scoop are interviewed in Toronto between 2012 and 2013. Much has been written about Indigenous Research Methodologies, which is discussed in the thesis. Although autoethnography is used in this study the thesis is only partly autoethnographic. Autoethnography was used as a tool to help Sixties Scoop survivors to speak more freely. The method of a scrapbook of memories relating to the adoptive experience (Arts-informed/Indigenous) was also used to help build a relationship with the adoptees that are interviewed. These adoptees expressed many of the same symptoms described by Residential School survivors. These are the symptoms recognized as post-traumatic stress disorder. Some of the experiences these adoptees relate are long-term depression, recurring suicidal thoughts, a feeling of worthlessness and abandonment, chronic tiredness and a marked tendency to sabotage relationships. These experiences are coupled with a seeming irreparable sense of loss and broken relationships with both birth and adoptive families and communities. These adoptees feel their voices have not been heard and have difficulty finding a place to call their own.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".