The Instrumentalization of French-Speaking Immigration in Canada Within a Colonial and Economistic Approach: A Critical Discourse Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Since the early 2000s, immigration has been a key issue for Francophone minority communities. Several studies indicate that a gap exists between discourses open to immigration and practices leading to exclusion. However, this article questions the so-called ‘openness’ of discourses on Francophone immigration. As part of a larger ethnographic study using multiple methods, we analyzed 87 documents produced by selected governmental and non-governmental authorities since 2010 in relation to Francophone immigration. Our findings show that discourses on Francophone immigration: a) are part of the broader colonial and economistic approach of Canadian immigration policies, b) present diversity as a challenge and c) do not centre immigrants’ voice. These power dynamics already present in these discourses likely hinder the implementation of inclusive practices at the community scale. Résumé: Depuis le début des années 2000, l’immigration est un enjeu clé pour les communautés francoph-ones en situation minoritaire (CFSM). Plusieurs recherches indiquent qu’un décalage existe entre des discours ouverts à l’immigration et des pratiques menant à de l’exclusion. Cependant, cet article remet en question la soi-disant « ouverture » des discours sur l’immigration francophone. Dans le cadre d’une étude ethnographique plus large utilisant diverses méthodes, nous avons analysé 87 documents produits par plusieurs autorités gouvernementales et non gouvernementales depuis 2010, en lien avec l’immigration francophone. Nos résultats indiquent que les discours sur l’immigration francophone a) s’inscrivent dans l’approche coloniale et économiciste de l’immigration canadienne plus large, b) présentent la diversité comme un défi et c) prennent peu en compte la voix des immigrants. Ces dynamiques de pouvoir déjà présentes dans les discours ne facilitent sans doute pas la mise en place de pratiques inclusives à l’échelle communautaire.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".