MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242463009 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648889

Bridging the gap : a study of the Ryerson University, Chang School of Continuing Education, Internationally Educated Social Work Professionals Bridging Program

2021· preprint· en· W4242463009 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark Davidson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Human capitalSocial capitalPublic relationsContinuing educationStakeholderBusinessWork (physics)Political scienceMedical educationEconomic growthEconomicsMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines how the Internationally Educated Social Work Professionals Bridging Program at Ryerson University facilitates the integration of Internationally Educated Social Workers (IESWs) into the Canadian labour market. Research indicates that Internationally Educated Professionals (IEPs) often face significant barriers that restrict them from effectively utilizing their foreign-obtained human capital. Occupational bridging programs are one type of program that has proven effective at increasing the employment rates of the IEPs who participate in them (Adamowicz, 2004; Dean Marie, Austin, & Zubin, 2004; Alboim, Finnie, & Meng, 2005). Through individual interviews conducted with program participants and key stakeholder representatives, this study identifies the barriers that IESWs face in the labour market, the challenges facing the IESW bridging program, and the perceived benefits of the program. The findings of this study reveal that unlike other labour market integration programs the IESWs bridging program comprehensively addresses many of the individual and systemic barriers that restrict IESWs from maximizing returns to their human capital.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207