I didn’t do that! Contested Definitions of Racialized Immigrant Youth in the Extra-Judicial Sanctions Program: Uncovering Hidden Voices.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social organization of knowledge focuses on how knowledge is created, enacted and shared by individuals in order to coordinate people’s actions. Using the frameworks of Institutional Ethnography (IE) and Critical Race Theory (CRT), this paper will look at the process of hearing the cases of racialized immigrant youth who are referred to the Extra-judicial Sanctions program in Calgary. I investigate how cultural knowledge impacts the way in which the youth’s cases are adjudicated. In particular, looking at how knowledge about various racialized and ethnic groups is gained in an environment of popular discourse, and how this influences the cases of racialized immigrant youth. I then look at how this racialized knowledge impacts the process of the youth and their families attempting to contest the definitions that are assigned to them during the hearing process. I suggest that in the context of a neo-liberal, “colour-blind” Canadian society and policy, workers in the EJS process draw on their own cultural understandings in order to interpret the interactions with racialized immigrant youth, which then impacts the ability of the youth to truly have their voices heard.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".