Negotiated positions : Immigrant women’s views and experiences of employment in Canada. Affilia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the basis of a qualitative study with immigrant women in Windsor, Ontario, this article looks at women’s responses to the challenges they face in the Canadian workplace, together with the value they place on working outside the home. The women reflected on their job searches, employment conditions, and work experiences as mediated by the norms and traditions of their home countries. Because of the struggle to obtain a job and the delicacy of retaining a job in a precarious economic climate, the women did not fight the discrimination they encountered in the workplace. Keywords case studies, gender identity, immigration and migration, multiculturalism Research on the economic activities of immigrant women in Canada and the United States has increased over the past two decades. Some of this research has examined how immigrant women juggle the demands of family and paid work in the new societies in which they have settled, thereby demonstrating the need for governmental policies that address the specific challenges they face (Barber, 2000; Grahame, 2003). Another area of research has focused on examining the gender-slanted ways of engaging women and men in the new societies they are living in. The
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".