An Ethnography of a Homework Club Started by a Group Of Immigrant Parents. A Space for Social Mobility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The involvement of parents in the education of their children has been the subject of research since the Coleman report of the 1970s. Pupil achievement seems to depend on this involvement, and in Canada, a multicultural country, this also applies to parents who have experienced migration. In the context of the collaboration between schools and families, this paper examines the role of a homework club in French, created at the initiative of parents who have lived through migration. The ethnographic study of this club (club boundaries, space-time, parental role, involvement in subject knowledge and homework, use of language, the club's function as a space of social mobility) provides evidence of its declared aims and, in particular, an implicit claim about creating a bridge allowing families to progress, socially, through their children. The club works under specific rules copied from Canadian schools, or inherited from members' countries of origin. Advocating a hierarchical and ordered approach to learning, it differentiates itself from other clubs, which are more play-oriented. The study contradicts the oft-heard comments regarding inadequate or disengaged parents, it encourages an interest in research into intermediate spaces, created at the margins of school and public institutions, and leads to a questioning of the role of the state, and of public policies concerning the integration of new arrivals.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".