Refugee Parental Involvement: A Study of Refugee Parents in the Greater Toronto Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parental involvement enhances student learning and educational experiences and can specifically increase equitable access in education. Refugee parental involvement supports children’s learning and development, as well as the child’s and family’s integration into Canadian society, culture and institutions thereby providing the parents and family with beneficial social and cultural capital. This study investigates how refugee parents in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) want to be involved in their children’s education using a critical qualitative research design in order to explore their views, experiences and knowledge. The conceptual framework incorporates key ideas from literature on parental involvement approaches, barriers and applications in order to understand refugee experiences. Twelve refugee parents from GTA schools were interviewed using semi-structured interviews that included questions on involvement practices, knowledge, and desires. The data revealed consistencies and discrepancies with literature on parental involvement, illuminating similarities in the forms of involvement, while revealing differences in how refugee parents participate. In addition, refugee parents had similar barriers, but also had additional challenges due to migration related stressors, and language and cultural abilities. Refugee parents shared their preferred forms of involvement, including effective knowledge sharing, increasing parental agency through collaboration, removal of barriers and inclusion of their needs, and strengths-based and respectful opportunities for involvement. These preferred forms of involvement are the recommendations of this dissertation, and include a discussion on practical applications and implementation. They provide significant changes in practice which should be integrated into policy to ensure that refugee parents can access and use their cultural and transcultural capital.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".