Inappropriate Settlers And East End Heathens: The Philanthropic Abduction Of The British Home Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uplifting the Imperial Race: Eugenics, Salvation, and the British Home Children Movement. This project captures the intricacies of the BHC movement’s eugenic philosophy from the British perspective starting in 1868, charting its origins within Poor Law policy and Galtonian theory, as well as establishing its pervasive presence within in the works of Thomas Barnardo and William Booth. For this research, I utilize dozens of primary and secondary sources including, but not limited to, the entire collection of Dr. Thomas John Barnardo’s self-funded publications and The Oxford Handbook of the History of Eugenics. I also demonstrate how the eugenic philosophy undergirding the British Home Children Movement originated in Britain. Inappropriate Settlers and East End Heathens: The Philanthropic Abduction of the British Home Children. This project establishes the survivors of the British Home Children Movement as settler colonial anomalies whose complicated identities as well as resistance to settler colonial constructs contributed to their mistreatment in the settler Dominion of Canada. Undergirding this research are primary and secondary sources in the form of periodicals, philanthropic publications, and personal testimonies which illuminate how the Home Children’s experiences share drastic similarities with the First Nations Children forced into residential homes across Canada. My research also incorporates the works of immigration and British Poor Law scholars like Sally Brooke Cameron and Lydia Murdoch to establish the transatlantic tensions which rendered the subjects of the British Home Children Movement as settler colonial outcasts with no home or heritage. This parallels the First Nations Children of Canada who were abducted from their families, dispossessed of their heritage and homelands, and shunned by the invading settler community. In its paying attention to the Home Children’s abductions, institutionalizations, and burials within mass unmarked graves across Canadian provinces, this project challenges the settler colonial binary and reestablishes the Home Children as what historian Patricia Rooke calls “inappropriate settlers.”
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".