MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384025390 · doi:10.32920/23589681.v1

Considering the roles of human capital and social capital in LINC Programming for newcomers in Canada

2023· preprint· en· W4384025390 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward Killin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman capitalSocial capitalRefugeeImmigrationSettlement (finance)Political scienceGovernment (linguistics)CitizenshipCapital (architecture)Public relationsSociologyBusinessEconomic growthLinguisticsPoliticsEconomicsLawFinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Being able to speak English is one of the most important skills for newcomers who arrive in Canada without compentency in these language abilities. There are several formal services in Canada offered to newcomers for learning English, including Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC), which is delivered by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). In addition to LINC, several community English-language programs have been developed in Toronto for different newcomer groups. Thus, to contribute to best practices for integrating newcomers, particularly refugees, into Canadian society through language training, the author will conduct an exploratory investigation of LINC and other language training programs, through the theoretical lenses of human capital and social capital. This dissertation will compile a list of actionable items that could be pursued to enhance the federal government’s LINC program and, ultimately, better serve the both the educational and community needs of newcomers to Canada. Keywords: human capital, social capital, LINC, ESL/EAL, language training, newcomer integration, settlement services

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207