MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4244151266 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14644155

Serving immigrant families: using knowledge translation to inform a family approach in the settlement sector

2021· preprint· en· W4244151266 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tania Dargy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)ConceptualizationImmigrationCitizenshipEconomic growthRefugeePolitical scienceSocial policyImmigration policyPublic relationsSociologyBusinessPoliticsEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research studies show that the family is an integral dimension of newcomers’ immigration and settlement experiences. Findings from a recent project on the integration trajectories of immigrant families shed light on the ways families support each other and the social factors of immigration. Still, immigration policy, federal data collection and measures, as well as settlement services rely on an individualistic conceptualization of newcomers with insufficient regard for their social realities. Preliminary consultations with partner settlement agencies in the Greater Toronto Area reveal there is a need to incorporate the family/social dimension in their services. Using the Knowledge Translation method, academic knowledge was transferred into a practical position paper for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada settlement policy-makers. Through ongoing collaboration with the partners, the pillars of a Family Approach for the settlement sector were developed. Five key practical recommendations for its implementation are presented to policy-makers in the paper.

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)0.089
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0890.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0150.017
Scholarly communication0.0190.017
Open science0.0030.018
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→