Immigrant human service providers working within their own communities, the impact on their lives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the impact of being a human service provider on the personal lives of immigrant workers who serve members of their own community. A review of the literature indicates that limited research exists which is directly focussed on the lives of immigrant service providers and the implications of providing services to their own ethnic community members. Using a qualitative research approach, individual interviews were conducted with immigrant human service providers. Interviews focused on workers' lives at work, in the home and in the community. Analysis of the data shows that these human service providers experience pressures related to being a public figure in the community. All face conflicting, high and unrealistic expectations and struggle with being involved with clientele in areas which go over and above that required by their job description. The study participants are required to deal with a job that crosses into family and social life. Adjustments made to ways of working are evident and are outlined in the findings. The ideas emerging from this study led the researcher to an entirely different body of literature which outlines issues consistent with the findings on the lives of faith group leaders. Issues for supervisors of immigrant service providers are discussed. Recommendations emerging from the study include the need to recognize the issues faced by immigrant human service providers working with their own communities and challenges to supervisors. Further exploration of literature related to the lives of faith group leaders, particularly writings regarding training and support of workers, may prove useful.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".