An exploration of the lived experiences of non-Aboriginal foster parents in providing care for children from remote First Nations communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is research to support the existence of an over representation of Aboriginal children in the care of child and family services agencies in Manitoba. This issue presents many challenges in providing culturally appropriate foster care in order to promote the well-being and self-identity of Aboriginal children in care. The majority of these children are placed in non-Aboriginal foster homes. This study explored the experiences of non-Aboriginal foster parents in order to better understand their experiences and the services and supports necessary in providing culturally appropriate care to children from remote First Nations communities. A qualitative research design based on a phenomenological approach was utilized. Significant themes that emerged through the study were the foster parents’ motivations to foster and the challenges they face. Other significant themes are their perceptions of the services and supports available to them, and future resources that would assist them to provide care to children from remote First Nations communities. The results of the study indicate that the non-Aboriginal foster parents were culturally receptive and willing to provide culturally sensitive care to children from remote First Nations communities. The study results suggest that there needs to be further research exploring the motivations, roles, and responsibilities of foster care providers. By gaining a better understanding of their motivations, perceived roles and responsibilities, foster care agencies may be better informed when designing recruitment, retention strategies, and training for foster care providers in cross cultural foster care.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".