Volunteering with Newcomers: The Perspectives of Canadian- and Foreign-born Volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Canadian- and foreign-born volunteers have contributed to the settlement of newcomers into Canadian society. Despite their important contribution, little has been reported about the experiences and perspectives of these volunteers. Using the information collected from face-to-face interviews with 60 Canadian- and foreign-born volunteers who support newcomers, this article discusses factors that motivate people to volunteer with newcomers. The study results revealed among other findings that (1) to become a volunteer, one not only needs to be motivated but also needs to believe that volunteering will produce the expected positive results and to have confidence in one’s ability to complete the assigned tasks, (2) once people become volunteers, the experience of volunteering tests their perceived self-efficacy and their belief about the effectiveness of their volunteer work. Success or failure in their expectations influences their decision to continue or discontinue their volunteer work. RÉSUMÉ De nombreux bénévoles nés au Canada et à l’étranger contribuent à l’intégration de nouveaux venus dans la société canadienne. Malgré leurs contributions importantes, il y a peu d’écrits sur les expériences et perspectives de ces bénévoles. Cet article se fonde sur des entrevues face à face avec soixante bénévoles nés au Canada ou à l’étranger afin de mieux comprendre ce qui les motive à aider les nouveaux venus. Les résultats révèlent entre autres que (1) pour devenir bénévole, non seulement faut-il être motivé mais il faut aussi croire que le bénévolat entraînera bien les effets positifs escomptés et être confiant de son aptitude à accomplir les tâches assignées et (2) l’expérience du bénévolat met à l’épreuve la perception de sa propre efficacité et l’impression qu’on a de la valeur de son travail bénévole. Le succès ou l’échec de ces attentes a une influence sur la décision de continuer à faire du bénévolat ou non.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".