MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254919053 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14655108

Neither Temporary, Nor Permanent: The Precarious Employment Experiences of Refugee Claimants in Toronto

2021· preprint· en· W4254919053 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samantha Jackson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeEmployabilityCitizenshipImmigrationPolitical scienceFace (sociological concept)Refugee lawDemographic economicsSociologyLawEconomicsPoliticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While Canada’s immigration system is shaped primarily by the nation’s economic needs, refugee claimants’ motivations are, by nature, non-economic. Resultantly, refugee claimants are often portrayed as a drain on Canadian resources. Despite this however, refugee claimants’ employment experiences remain underrepresented in the literature. This study explores the employment experiences of refugee claimants in Toronto, and finds that claimants face distinct and unique barriers stemming from their precarious legal status. Additionally, as neither temporary workers nor permanent citizens, this study finds that refugee claimants perceive employment as an integrative expression of belonging and citizenship. Through the lens of refugeeness, this study traces the subjective employment trajectories of refugee claimants. Findings indicate that refugee claimants’ employability is shaped by real and ascribed barriers associated with their citizenship status, creating decidedly unique and often difficult employment experiences.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 topicMigration, Refugees, and Integration→French-language works237,207→