Dealing with the Legacy of Native Residential School Abuse: Litigation, ADR, and Restorative Justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, a number of civil litigation suits have been filed in Canada against the federal government and four major Christian churches by former students of Canadian Native residential schools. Abuse and other harms in the residential schools are alleged. Jennifer Llewellyn states that litigation has proven problematic as a mechanism to respond to the abuse and other harms. The suits place a significant burden on the court system and threaten to bankrupt the relevant Church organizations. Hence, some of those involved have turned to â alternative dispute resolutionâ? (ADR) mechanisms to respond to the issues through means other than litigation. Llewellyn believes that ADR mechanisms cannot provide an appropriate resolution to claims concerning the residential schools. She argues that restorative justice provides a new and better lens through which meaningful alternatives can be envisioned for dealing with the residential school situation in Canada.
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 | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.067 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| 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".