FAMILY WORKS - Navigating earning and parenting using non-standard employment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gender inequality persists in Canada. Canadian women are more likely to work part-time, take on more household chores and earn less than men. Overall fewer women work than men in Canada; with the largest gaps in urban centres with high costs of childcare. This gender inequality exists within a regulatory system and public social programs that reinforce gender stereotypes; and, a labour market that is rapidly shifting towards non-standard employment. \n \nThis project had two goals. First, to support a human-centred design approach to developing gender equality through developing public policy, workplace practices, and social innovations. And second, to extend the understanding of how and why parents are constructing their earning and parenting roles in a variety of non-standard employment relationships \n \nSeven heterosexual couples and one single mother who are working in non-standard employment arrangements were interviewed to understand their motivations and decision factors regarding paid employment, domestic and parenting activities; what they are looking for in earning arrangements; the challenges and benefits of their current arrangements; and, future aspirations and concerns. \n \nThe qualitative data from those interviews were used to identify to identify implications, an overall problem challenge, a set of innovation opportunities, design principles and a set of future research areas. \n \nThe parents interviewed in this project are using non-standard employment relationships to meet their own earning and parenting goals of maximizing their time with their children and both being involved parents while doing gender differently. \n \nThese parents’ choices are consistent with a shifting view of domestic sharing, gender equality and a revaluing of caregiving activities in society. They could reflect a new model of earning; however, they also highlight the significant risks borne by earners in non-standard employment relationships because of a mismatch of the social safety net and shifting values.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".