MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801329902 · doi:10.7202/1043658ar

Free to Learn? Education in Australia’s Offshore Immigration Detention Centres

2018· article· en· W2801329902 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christina Szurlej

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsTruancyDisadvantagedImmigrationHarmGovernment (linguistics)Futures contractRight to educationNeglectPolitical scienceImmigration detentionHuman rightsCriminologyPublic administrationEconomic growthSociologyLawPsychologyBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children seeking asylum are among the most vulnerable groups in the world. Arriving in a country of refuge should be synonymous with safety; this is not so in Australia. Unaccompanied children arriving by boat are automatically transferred to and detained in the Regional Processing Centre on the Republic of Nauru with no one to advocate on their behalf of their rights and best interests, including their right to an adequate education. Trapped on the small island and uncertain of their futures, children overwhelmingly expressed despair and helplessness, many turning to self-harm. In 2015, the Australian government awarded the contract for education to Broadspectrum, formerly known as Transfield Services Ltd. – a company implicated in the abuse and neglect of children. Since then, truancy rates have increased due to fears for safety, poor structural conditions in schools, and lack of qualified teachers. Failing to provide access to education thwarts the life chances of youth who are already severely disadvantaged and contravenes Australia’s international human rights obligations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Université de MonctonSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207