MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913422454

Factors Affecting Academic Outcomes among Immigrant and Refugee Youth Arriving to Calgary from Arab Countries

2017· article· en· W2913422454 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dania El Chaar

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and experiences of immigrants and refugees
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeImmigrationPopulationGender studiesPolitical scienceDemographyGeographySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has a long history of welcoming immigrants and refugees from all over the world. Currently, newcomer youth represent 25 % of all Canadians under the age of 18 (Statistic Canada, 2012). Furthermore, with the recent influx of Syrian refugees, this percentage is expected to increase, as within the 25,000 refugees who arrived in Canada until February 2016, 48.8 % were under the age of 18 (IRCC, 2015). The Canadian school system has had little time to react to this influx. Research among immigrant and refugee youth focused mainly on the three main Canadian cities of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, (Anisef & Kilbride, 2003) and very little is known about newcomer youth in Calgary, Alberta. Prior studies have shown that newcomer youth have faced challenges, (Ochocka, et al., Kelly, 2014) however, very little is known about what kind of challenges might immigrant and refugee youth from Arab countries have and, how would they face it as compared to other ethno-cultural groups of newcomers. The purpose of the study was to explore factors helping or challenging youth in terms of academic outcomes in Calgary, Alberta, and how this population of students can be better supported.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of EducationSame topicEducation and experiences of immigrants and refugeesFrench-language works237,207