MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229939315 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14644134

How does the professional identity of teachers from India change when they work as early childhood educators in Ontario?

2021· preprint· en· W4229939315 on OpenAlexaffabout
Preeti Alwani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)InterviewValue (mathematics)Compensation (psychology)Work (physics)PedagogyProfessional developmentEarly childhoodPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceMedical educationMedicineSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many Early Childhood Educators (ECE) in Toronto are foreign-educated teachers. They take up this profession because they cannot enter the teaching profession. Training as ECEs takes a shorter time, has lower entry requirements, and is more affordable. The case studies undertaken for this project are based on qualitative data collected by interviewing and observing two former teachers from India, now working as ECEs in a for-profit daycare. The data shows that because of low compensation rates, poorer working conditions, and lack of appreciation, community and respect, especially compared to what they received in India, these teachers report a downward spiral in their professional identity. Their daily routines and practices follow the norms in childcare centers, but they feel as though their employers and parents do not value them. As a result, these ECEs struggling to suppress their dominant teacher identity, think of themselves simply as ‘babysitters’ and do not value the work they do.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0200.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEarly Childhood Education and Development→French-language works237,207→