The experiences of first-generation Punjabi students at Simon Fraser University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to develop a deep description of the experiences of first-generation Punjabi students who have no familial history of Canadian postsecondary education, in order to understand their challenges, their support systems, their community and their overall experiences with postsecondary education. Bourdieu’s (1977a, 1986) social reproduction theory was used as the conceptual framework using descriptive case study methodology to answer the research question: What are the experiences of first-generation Punjabi students at Simon Fraser University? The interview conversations explored the navigation of multiple worlds, notably the family environment, the university environment, and the Punjabi community. The conversations described the navigation of experiences that inform students' experiences as first-generation Punjabi university students. Core experiences with navigation of race and ethnicity, gender, role as a university student, role within the Punjabi community, and role within family represent multiple and intersecting dimensions significant to students' experiences as first-generation Punjabi university students. The findings show first-generation Punjabi university students negotiated Punjabi values and expectations, Canadian values and expectations, university and family responsibilities, pioneering postsecondary education, responsibility to give back to family and the Punjabi community, and pressure to uphold family honour. Living at the connection of numerous worlds, including experiences as the first family member to attend university and engaging both in Punjabi culture and in Canadian culture. Participants associated five strengths with being first-generation Punjabi university students: family, Punjabi culture, immigration, support network—before university and during university, and a strong sense of seva (i.e., selfless service). This study has implications for theory, research, and practice in Canadian postsecondary education. This research supports the need for university services tailored to students who are the first in their family to attend university.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".