Beyond food: contributions of a community kitchen and a community garden to the well-being of the Francophone and Francophile community of St. John's, Newfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case study examines the impact of a community kitchen and a community \ngarden developed by the Association communautaire francophone de Saint-Jean (ACFSJ) \non Francophones and Francophiles living in St. John’s. The purpose of the study is to \ngain an understanding of the potential roles these activities play among Francophone and \nFrancophile minority communities. The study used document consultation, participant \nobservation, and in-depth interviews with 24 study participants. \nFindings indicate that the community kitchen and the community garden provide \nnumerous benefits at the individual and community level. The activities foster much more \nthan knowledge, skills, and a healthy lifestyle. They become vehicles for cultural and \nethnolinguistic socialization, conscientization, and cultural and linguistic continuity. They \nfoster a sense of community belonging, empowerment, cultural and linguistic safety, as \nwell as psychological, social, cultural, and linguistic well-being. They support gathering \nbetween Francophones and Francophiles. They are spaces where identities are \nconstructed and reconstructed. Findings reveal that Francophones and Francophiles are \nseeking opportunities to assert their identity, to be engaged in the development of the \ncommunity, and to enhance their collective pride via activities that resonate with their \nidentity, values, and interests. Above all, findings call for a holistic understanding of \nhealth and well-being, which encompasses cultural and linguistic well-being. They call \nfor an expanded understanding of how we imagine well-being to include cultural and \nethnolinguistic identity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".