MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2879616469 · doi:10.18584/iipj.2018.9.2.5

Indigenous Access to Skilled Jobs in the Canadian Forest Industry: The Role of Education

2018· article· en· W2879616469 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ian Graham Cahill

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Indigenous Policy Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsIndigenousGraduation (instrument)Context (archaeology)Demographic economicsLogitIndex (typography)Economic growthSociologyGeographySocioeconomicsPolitical scienceBusinessEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the effect of education on the skill level of jobs held by Indigenous people working in the Canadian forest industry is examined. A skill index based on detailed occupation is used as the dependent variable in ordered logit models estimated using data from Statistics Canada’s 2011 National Household Survey (NHS). Results are obtained by gender. In the case of men, for Métis (a specific mixed European and Indigenous culture) and for First Nations living off reserve estimates of the effect of education are similar to those for non-Indigenous people. The estimated effect is lower for those Indigenous people living on reserve, particularly for those whose employment is also on the reserve. Results for women are similar, though often not statistically significant due to the limited sample size. High school graduation appears insufficient to provide access to better jobs, whereas post-secondary education, including trade certificates and community college, is very effective. The article concludes with a suggestion that, while closing the lag in Indigenous rates of high school education is critical, this must provide a gateway to further education. A discussion provides more policy context.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Indigenous Policy JournalSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207