MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177892279 · doi:10.1111/cars.12082

The Earnings and Employment Outcomes of the 2005 Cohort of Canadian Postsecondary Graduates with Disabilities

2015· article· en· W2177892279 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Zarifa, David Walters, Brad Seward

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceEarningsDisadvantagedIncentiveHuman capitalCohortPostsecondary educationDemographic economicsPsychologyAging in the American workforcePolitical scienceHigher educationEconomic growthBusinessEconomicsMedicineAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada's fear of future skill and labor shortages has brought youth with disabilities to the forefront of public policy. Many universities are now reporting that an increased proportion of their graduating students identify as having a disability, and as a result, educational achievement-based programs designed to accommodate students' needs are growing across campuses. Despite recent attention by policymakers on improving accessibility standards and increasing employer incentives, young Canadians with disabilities continue to face barriers in their transitions to the workforce. The nature and extent of the early workforce inequalities faced by postsecondary graduates with disabilities remains unclear. This paper draws on the 2005 cohort of Statistics Canada's National Graduates Survey to examine the early workforce outcomes of postsecondary graduates with disabilities. Contrary to theories of human capital, the results reveal significant earnings gaps between graduates with and without disabilities of various fields of study and levels of schooling. Further, graduates with a disability are even more disadvantaged in terms of securing employment, as they were significantly less likely to be employed full-time, and were overrepresented among unemployed and part-time workers across various fields of study and levels of postsecondary education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207