MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409234497 · doi:10.56334/sei/8.1.26

Education as a tool for social integration of migrants and refugees: Russian experience in the global context

2025· article· en· W4409234497 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Education and Innovations in the Context of Modern Problems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCentral Asia Education and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeContext (archaeology)Social integrationSociologyPolitical scienceGeographyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is devoted to the study of the role of education as an instrument of social integration of migrants and refugees in Russia in comparison with international experience.The aim of the paper is to identify the specifics of the Russian approach to integration through education, as well as to conduct a comparative analysis with the practices of Germany, Turkey and other countries.The methodological framework was based on the analysis of Russian legislation, case studies of regional adaptation programmes (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Tatarstan) and comparative analysis of Eurostat and UNHCR data.The main results of the study showed that the integration of migrant children in Russia faces systemic barriers: linguistic (68% of children do not speak Russian at the level of their peers), administrative (40% of families lack documents) and cultural (isolation in schools).At the same time, successful local initiatives have been identified: language courses, NGO projects (Such Children, Ark), and digital solutions.However, the lack of a unified federal strategy limits their effectiveness.Comparison with the experience of Germany (compulsory language courses), Canada (the role of NGOs) and Turkey (EdTech) emphasises the need for a systematic approach.The conclusion offers recommendations: introduction of compulsory language programmes, simplification of bureaucratic procedures, development of intercultural projects and digital technologies, as well as consideration of regional specifics.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.356 · 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