The 2019 policy changes to Canada's parent and grandparent sponsorship program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On January 28th, 2019, Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) opened the most recent application form for the Parent and Grandparent Sponsorship form (PGP). After 11 minutes, the 27,000 spots allocated for the "Interest to Sponsor" (ITS) forms had been filled and IRCC announced that the application had closed (Harris, 2019). This study will review the literature on the evolution of family reunification in Canadian immigration policies and will include a critical analysis of the 2019 PGP sponsorship program. It will explore the changes to the online system for the 2019 PGP application process, outlining its failure to provide an equitable opportunity for those wishing to reunite with their family members in Canada. By placing the most recent experience with the 2019 PGP application process in the context of the history of family reunification policies in Canada, this study will identify the continuities and changes in the ideologies buiding policy shifts and will highlight what is and isn’t working in the current policy. Keywords: Canadian immigration policy, family reunification, family sponsorship, parent and grandparent sponsorship program
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".