The Educational Attainments of the “Second Generation”: A Comparative Study of Britain, Canada, and the United States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background This analysis compares the educational attainments of the “new” second generation in Britain, Canada, and the United States using three nationally representative datasets. Objective To assess how the second generation has fared within Western educational systems. The study examines the achievements of seven minority ethnic groups: Africans, Caribbeans, Chinese, Filipinos, Indians, Irish, and Pakistanis. Setting Britain, Canada, and the United States. Research Design Secondary data analysis Conclusions The study suggests that there is a strong association between the educational level of the parental generation and that of the second generation. There is substantial inter-generational progress (measured relative to the majority population in the country of destination), especially among women. Most groups perform as well as or better than members of the majority population of the same age and similar parental background. Chinese of both sexes are notable for their high performance. Indians also tend to make strong intergenerational progress; for Caribbeans, Africans, and Filipinos, this is more muted. The performance of the second generation in Britain is slightly poorer than that in the other countries. This is probably explained by the lower selectivity of the first generation in Britain rather than by institutional features.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it