MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516880559 · doi:10.1002/cdq.12060

Career Development of Chinese Canadian Professional Immigrants

2016· article· en· W2516880559 on OpenAlexaffabout
Charles P. Chen, Julie Wai Ling Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Career Development Quarterly · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationProsperityCareer developmentVocational educationProfessional developmentPrejudice (legal term)SociologyPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)Public relationsGender studiesEconomic growthPsychologyPedagogySocial psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chinese professional immigrants make up the 2nd largest visible minority group in Canada. Their successful resettlement in the host country is inextricably tied to the prosperity and success of the general Canadian society that depends heavily on its immigration practice for the country's development and growth. However, there is a dearth of literature and research on this particular population, especially in the areas of career development and vocational psychology based on the unique cultural context of Canada. To address the pivotal career needs of Chinese professional immigrants, this article identifies and discusses 6 prominent career‐related barriers they face in the resettlement process: migration‐related stressors; language proficiency; cultural nuances and knowledge; discrimination and prejudice; foreign‐earned experiences, education, and credentials not recognized; and family separation and fragmentation. Strategies to tackle these career development barriers are proposed from a life‐career integrated perspective, alongside ideas and strategies for effective career interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Career Development QuarterlySame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207