‘Placing’ integration: A critical exploration of immigrants’ occupations in London, Ontario, Canada and Auckland, New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are currently undertaking a comparative international study exploring the integration experiences of a group of multi-national migrants in London, Ontario, Canada and Auckland, New Zealand. International migration is a multi-layered process involving a range of transitions in relation to physical, economic, political, social and cultural aspects of place and occupation (Huot & Laliberte Rudman, 2010; Nayar & Hocking, 2006). Immigrants’ abilities to engage in occupations are central to the process of settling and integrating into a new society (Nayar, Hocking & Wilson, 2007), yet many migration theories fail to explicitly acknowledge the centrality of occupations in the immigration, settlement and integration process. This research will address migrants’ changes in everyday occupations, such as child care or work, and the impacts of these transitions upon their potential for successful integration. Our study will further contribute to the literature by testing the usefulness and applicability of an innovative occupation-based theory of migration, ‘Navigating Cultural Spaces’ developed by Nayar (2009), as well as Huot’s (2011) method of ‘occupational mapping’.\nA critical ethnography consisting of 2 primary stages is being undertaken. Stage 1 entails a review of immigration and policy documents, as well as epidemiological data pertaining to migration in New Zealand and Canada. Its purpose is to identify similarities and differences in patterns of migration as well as in the social structures addressing migrant settlement and integration in the two contexts. Stage 2 involves data collection with 20 immigrants (10 in Auckland and 10 in London). Methods consist of a narrative interview and occupational mapping, whereby participants create a mental map outlining how their daily occupations are embedded in particular places. The narrative interview will elicit a story of the settlement and integration process from each participant. The maps will help to ‘place’ this story by detailing their local spatial use. This serves as a way of identifying routine occupations that participants’ may not think important enough to highlight explicitly within their narratives given their tacit nature. Analysis will be informed by Bourdieu’s theory of practice to enable the interpretation of maps and narratives related to how occupation, and processes integration are inherently place-based. Preliminary findings presented will illustrate how occupational mapping can serve occupational scientists who seek to better understand connections between place and occupation.\nPotential questions for the discussion period: How does place shape the occupational possibilities available to immigrants? How are places shaped by the occupations that are engaged in within them? How does the arrival of immigrants alter the nature of places within which they settle? How does moving from one country (place) to another alter the occupations engaged in by immigrants?
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".