MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313413148 · doi:10.35765/mjse.2022.1122.13

Assessment of the Polish Diaspora’s Access to Education in the Toronto Metropolitan Area and Their Evaluation of the Level of Education in the Context of Quality of Life

2022· article· en· W4313413148 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kamila Ziółkowska-Weiss

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Preschool and Elementary School Education/Multidisciplinary Journal of School Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaContext (archaeology)DiasporaQuality of life (healthcare)Higher educationQuality (philosophy)Economic growthSociologySocioeconomicsGeographyPsychologyGender studiesEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of the article is to depict access to education, both in terms of objective factors (quality of life) and subjective factors (standard of living), in the assessment of the Polish community living in the greater Toronto metropolitan area (GTA). The results of the research are presented on the basis of a questionnaire conducted among 583 Polish people living in the GTA. The results confirm that the Canadian Polish community evaluates highly the schools and other educational institutions operating within the study area. Another goal of the research was to investigate the possible influence of gender, income, or household size on the evaluation of access to education, which translates into a higher assessment of quality of life. In the study, the women and the respondents with higher income rated access to education more highly, while people in households with two to four people evaluated it the highest.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Preschool and Elementary School Education/Multidisciplinary Journal of School EducationSame topicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesFrench-language works237,207