“Teaching Somebody to Fish”: Implications for Immigrant-Serving Organizations and Employment in Edmonton and Winnipeg
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Provincial governments increasingly develop strategies that attract immigrants to settle in the Prairie Provinces. Although considerable research examines the role of settlement services in larger cities such as Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver, there is less information regarding mid-sized cities. Increasingly, newcomers are moving to Manitoba and Alberta due to real or perceived economic opportunities. Unfortunately, some immigrants experience difficulties during their settlement process, and their varied needs create challenges for immigrant-serving organizations as they develop programs. This study explores how philosophies of empowerment influence service providers and their programs for working with professional newcomers searching for meaningful employment. Semi-structured interviews with 21 service providers in Edmonton and Winnipeg illustrate how tensions between competing notions of empowerment and neoliberal ideologies interact to guide how service providers assist immigrants. Although empowerment is a goal of service provision, limited funding and resources may constrain the advocacy role of organizations. Les gouvernements provinciaux développent de plus en plus des stratégies qui attirent les immigrants à s’installer dans les provinces des prairies. Bien que d’importantes recherches examinent le rôle des services d’établissement dans métropoles comme Toronto, Montréal et Vancouver, il y a moins d’informations concernant les villes moyennes. De plus en plus, les nouveaux arrivants déménagent pour le Manitoba et l’Alberta en raison des opportunités économiques réelles et perçues. Malheureusement, certains immigrants rencontrent des difficultés au cours de leur processus d’intégration, et leurs besoins divers constituent un véritable défi pour les organismes d’aide aux immigrants dans l’élaboration de leurs programmes. Cette étude vise à explorer comment les philosophies d’autonomisation influencent les pourvoyeurs de service ainsi que leurs programmes dans leur travail avec les nouveaux arrivants qualifiés pour la recherche d’emplois significatifs. Les entrevues réalisées auprès de 21 pourvoyeurs de services semi-structurés à Edmonton et à Winnipeg illustrent les rivalités entre les notions d’autonomisation et les idéologies néolibérales qui interagissent pour orienter les pourvoyeurs de services afin qu’ils assistent mieux les immigrants. Bien que l’autonomisation soit l’objectif de ces prestations des services, les financements et ressources limités pourraient restreindre le rôle de plaidoyer des organismes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".