Newcomer Families’ Participation in Early Childhood Education Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early childhood education and care (ECEC) programs are often the first point of contact that newcomers have with formal institutions in their new country, and function as sites wherein children can gain access to the language, rules, and customs of the dominant society. However, newcomer families may experience specific barriers to accessing programs due to the lack of recognition of their existing social and cultural capital within the host country. Reporting on part of a larger mixed-methods study focused on the post-migration barriers to integration experienced by newcomers, this article explores newcomer families’ perspectives on the issues affecting their participation in ECEC programs. Qualitative data were collected from 96 newcomers to Canada during 13 focus groups. The findings suggest newcomer families grapple with reconciling three main points of disjuncture or conflict associated with these child care decisions: social networks, necessity and opportunity, and socialization goals. While participation in ECEC programs facilitated the development of forms of capital valued in the new context, these families also felt compelled to shed some of their own aspirations for their children’s socialization and learning.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".