MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2767614219

Looking for Work: How Second Generation Caribbean Black Male Youth Make Sense of Social Mobility, Social Networks and Employment Opportunities in Toronto

2017· dissertation· W2767614219 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anthony Briggs

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2017
Typedissertation
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsLearning Partnership
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mobilityWork (physics)SociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceEngineeringSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This dissertation project examines the ways in which working class Caribbean Black Males Youth (CBMY) that are in precariously employed seek to get full- time employment. These CBMY are subjected to being unprepared to access employment for two main reasons, either they fall into the 50% drop out rate (Allahar, 2010; Dei, 2008; Gordon Zinga, 2012; James, 2011) or these men fall into the 52 % of precariously employed in the Greater Toronto Area (Lewchuck et al., 2014; Block Galabuzi, 2011). Post high school transitions into the job market for these Black Males are expressed through their viewpoints. My research is theoretically grounded in Critical Race Theory in acknowledging that racism is embedded in Canadian life moving to capsulize the various complex ways CBMY navigate the demands of the market place in the city of Toronto. The aim is to conceptualize the meaning making process through key elements (i.e., schooling experiences, family experiences, peers conversations) shaped by their choices on deciding on particular kinds of employment. I argue that dominant social ideals of manhood are influenced by privileged, white, male middle-class standards. I therefore interrogate how CBMY make sense of themselves, either within or outside of these conventional standards of manhood and masculinity as it relates to precarious work. Based on these larger research arguments, I critically examine how CBMY address social issues of mobility, social networks and employment opportunities from their own perspectives.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity→French-language works237,207→