“You Can Do So Much Better Than What They Expect”: An Arts-Based Engagement Ethnography on School Integration With Newcomer Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Newcomer adolescents make up a large minority of Canada’s population and their positive integration experiences with education systems across the country are critical for both their development and the country’s long-term success. The current study examined newcomer adolescents’ ( n = 4, between 16 and 18 years old) integration experiences using an arts-based engagement ethnography to understand what influences their positive integration into the school system. Artifacts, interview, and focus group data were analyzed systematically using ethnographic research guidelines. Five structures were identified: (1) barriers to advancement at individual, school, and macro levels, (2) fluctuating relationship with cultural identity, (3) limited trust in systems, (4) resilience through independent learning, and (5) facilitating factors to positive integration experiences at the family and school level. In keeping with a relational developmental systems theory framework, each structure accounts for multiple inter- and intra-individual factors at multiple environmental levels. These findings outline considerations for systemic issues in academic institutions and offer suggestions for how institutions can better support newcomer adolescents.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".