MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“We all grow up with our mob because it takes all of us”: First Nations collective kinship in Australia

2024· article· en· W4405531905 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Beaufils, Jacynta Krakouer, AM Kelly, Dana Hogg

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren and Youth Services Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinshipSociologyPolitical scienceGenealogyCriminologyHistoryAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Being raised by and within ones' First Nations community, among one's mob and fully immersed in culture, is a fundamental part of the First Nations being. • Shifting towards systemic transformation through increased First Nations self-determination and control of OOHC systems and placements. • The Minintitja Care Model is an example of the power and promise that First Nations self-determination holds to deliever improved outcomes and accountability. • A Funddamental redesigning of OOHC services are delivered to First Nations children in Australia by drawing on First NAtions knowledges, traditions and values. Being raised by and within ones’ First Nations community, among one’s mob and fully immersed in culture, is a fundamental part of First Nations being. This is an aspect of First Nations being that has been disrupted through colonial practices targeting First Nations families, such as the Stolen Generations where 10–30% of all First Nations children were forcibly removed from their families in the twentieth century. It also continues in the contemporary through statutory child removals in Australia, where the continued overrepresentation of First Nations children in Australian child protection and OOHC systems has resulted in community concerns of another Stolen Generations. Shifting towards systemic transformation through increased First Nations self-determination and control of OOHC systems, this article describes an innovative model of kinship care, the ‘Minintitja Care Model’, that one First Nations community designed and delivered in rural New South Wales, Australia. The Minintitja Care Model is an example of the power and promise that First Nations self-determination holds to deliver improved outcomes for First Nations children in OOHC in Australia. We argue that it evidences the importance of fundamentally redesigning how OOHC services are delivered to First Nations children in Australia by drawing on First Nations knowledge, tradition and value. Yet redesigning a system that was not built for the benefit of First Nations children and families requires more than reform: it requires the bravery to envision new possibilities by drawing on ancient wisdom. This, we contend, is aligned with the tenets of abolition, as applied from a First Nations standpoint.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren and Youth Services ReviewSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207