Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter 1 assesses the history of migrant care worker organizing in Canada, weaving together an overview of key policies on migrant care work alongside the responses of migrant care workers’ organizations. Within this analysis, one can see that every single instance of policy change that is grounded in improving migrant care workers’ lives in Canada came, in part, because of care activism. Migrant care activists saw care for each other and for their imagined community of past, present, and future migrant care workers as being central in their work. Migrant care worker activists saw the deep injustices woven into their own experiences with abusive employers and recruiters, their invisibilization in the policy landscape, and their separation from their families. This chapter, of course, makes clear that there are deep-seated ideological divisions between migrant care worker organizations. In other words, the migrant care workers’ movement is far from being unified. Despite these differences, however, their demands for change fundamentally rest on their care for their fellow migrant care workers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".