Bibliographic record
Abstract
A well-known member of the circle of Confederation poets, Duncan Campbell Scott is generally considered a kind-hearted and sympathetic portrayer of the nobility of the Canadian Indian. But his real belief about the conditions and future of Canada's Native people is revealed in his official writings during his long tenure as Deputy Superintendent General of Indian Affairs. In A Narrow Vision, Brian Titley chronicles Scott's career in the Department of Indian Affairs and evaluates developments in Native health, education, and welfare between 1880 and 1932. He shows how Scott's response to challenges such as the making of treaties in northern Ontario, land claims in British Columbia, and the status of the Six Nations caused persistent difficulties and made Scott's term of office a turbulent one. Scott could never accept that Natives had legitimate grievances and held adamantly to the view that his department knew best. Not designed as a biography of Scott, nor intended to cast a shadow on his motives, this book assesses Euro-Canadian thinking on aboriginal rights at the turn of the century. Because Scott was chief adviser to his changing political masters as well as framer of official government documents, he held a pre-eminent position as arbiter of Native needs and claims. The only study of Native policy in the early twentieth century and the only work to focus on D.C. Scott's career in government, this book makes an important contribution to our understanding of the development of Canadian Native policy in this century.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.020 |
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".