Rethinking access to racial justice: Race discrimination and First Nations peoples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
woman from the Quandamooka people, asserts that the 'official' story about racism in Australia is that it exists only in 'small pockets of society or not at all'.First Nations peoples, she claims, tell quite a different story about where, when and how this problem manifests, identifying it as a significant issue with substantial personal and whole-of-community impacts. 1 Various studies and surveys confirm this.As an example, in a 2016 Northern Territory research project, Telling it like it is: Aboriginal perspectives on race and race relations, 64 per cent of the Aboriginal participants reported 'never' or 'rarely' being treated the same as non-Aboriginal people. 2 The Indigenous Legal Needs Project (ILNP) was a national research project looking at First Nations' access to justice in civil and family law areas that ran from 2011-2015.Depending on the jurisdiction in which they lived, between 28 per cent and 41 per cent of ILNP participants identified having encountered race-based discrimination in the previous two years. 3 Discrimination was described by participants as long-standing and omnipresent, suffered 'at least once a day, every day'.'You're going to face it no matter where you are at work, at home, school, wherever'. 4 First Nations peoples' experiences of discrimination range from the interpersonal to the institutional, encompassing blatant racial abuse in public spaces, under-and over-policing, being unable to obtain a private tenancy, being unable to access or to retain paid work, as well as having interactions with mainstream systems that continually fail to accommodate cultural and other needs and perspectives. 5
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".