MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392176657 · doi:10.46692/9781447364306.003

Canadian social work and the Sixties Scoop: reflections on the past, lessons for today

2023· other· en· W4392176657 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Filipe Duarte, Patrick Selmi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicResearch in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSCOOPWork (physics)SociologyVisual artsMedia studiesComputer scienceEngineeringArtMechanical engineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Social work's troubled past with Indigenous peoples in Canada represents one of the profession's darkest moments in the 20th century: a chapter that started with the residential schools – created to assimilate Indigenous children into Euro-Canadian society – and continued with the Sixties Scoop, which represented the policies and practices adopted to remove Indigenous children from Indigenous communities and to place them in foster care or to be adopted by White families (Nichols, 2017; Ferguson et al, 2018; Ioakimidis and Trimikliniotis, 2020). In the early 19 th century, when the colonial settlement process in Canada intensified, Indigenous peoples were subjugated to British colonial rule through the imposition of a colonial policy called the Indian Act, which aimed to ‘protect’ Indigenous people from European settlers (Shewell, 2002). However, such policy and colonial practices were intended primarily to ‘civilise the Indians’ in the name of Christianisation. This occurred through imposing assimilation strategies and practices, supported by the ideological biases of politicians, administrators and the broader society over the decades (Shewell, 2002). Such practices of settler colonialism inflicted on Indigenous peoples used child welfare as an approach to solving the ‘Indian Problem’ (Stevenson, 2020). By the late 1940s the social work profession was already playing a direct role in the child welfare system concerning Indigenous children. Social workers became directly involved in the removal of Indigenous children from Indigenous families and communities (Stevenson, 2020). This chapter sheds light on social work's troubled past with Indigenous peoples in Canada. It aims to discuss such ‘troubled histories’ of complicity, oppression and assimilation in an ongoing process of reconciliation with Indigenous peoples and preservation of social work memory (CASW, 2019; Ioakimidis and Trimikliniotis, 2020). Actions towards reconciliation The day of 30 September 2021 marked the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in Canada, an annual federal statutory holiday passed into federal law in June 2021 by Bill C-5. The creation of such a national day marked another important step in Canada's journey towards reconciliation with Indigenous people. The creation of a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation was one of the 94 Calls to Action made by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) in its final report, released in 2015 (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015; Canadian Heritage, 2021).

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0740.044
Scholarly communication0.0230.008
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0070.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch in Social SciencesFrench-language works237,207