Enhancing the Wellbeing of Immigrant Women of Immigrant Women Retirees
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This report summarizes the developmental evaluation process for Enhancing the Wellbeing of Immigrant Women Retirees, a participatory research project undertaken by Bow Valley College (BVC) and Calgary Immigrant Women’s Association (CIWA). Funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) Community and College Social Innovation grant, the project explored the experiences of immigrant women in Calgary. Consisting of two distinct phases, during phase one of this project the research team conducted 25 qualitative interviews with retired immigrant women in Calgary as well as interviews with key stakeholders who work with this population. This initial phase also saw the research team use participant observation to gain a deeper understanding of the facilitators and barriers to social and civic participation for retired immigrant women. During phase two, the team worked with a group of up to 10 retired immigrant women to co-create strategies and initiatives to combat isolation and overcome the challenges associated with aging. From May to November 2017, the co-creation group met bi-weekly to discuss and refine the research findings. The group moved from discussion to action by developing and testing two pilot initiatives to explore how to tackle the challenges that face retired immigrant women. A developmental evaluation process accompanied the co-creation element of the research. This process is an evaluation strategy embedded within an emerging initiative offering feedback and insight as the initiative develops. In an effort to offer a deeper understanding of participatory research, co-creation, and developmental evaluation, this report captures the project’s developmental evaluation process key learnings. Consisting of three main sections the report opens with an overview that describes the developmental evaluation methodology and as well as providing background on the co-creation process. Next the report examines the key developmental moments of the co-creation process. Developmental moments are “instances when the initiative shifts or moves forward in some significant way; moments of clarity, strategic insight, serendipity, connections and/or movement” (Dozois et al., 2010, p. 41). These moments also work to articulate the timeline and significant activities from the beginning to the end of the co-creation process. The final section of the report explores the group dynamics at play throughout co-creation including the layers of dynamics between participants, participants and project facilitators, and project partners (BVC and CIWA). The report concludes with a series of recommendations for future work and draws on key learnings to inform future collaborations of this nature. Five recommendations are identified and discussed: 1) be flexible and adjust expectations, 2) pay attention to differences between group participants and manage those carefully, 3) create opportunities for ownership by participants, 4) create a space that is hospitable and welcoming, and 5) find opportunities to learn through the collaborative process. Finally, the appendices include details about the outcomes of the co-creation process and provide relevant additional information. Of note: during phase two of this project, the Centre for Excellence in Immigrant and Intercultural Advancement underwent a transition and subsequent renaming to become the School of Global Access
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».